Subject: Re: Question for list

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 16:40:51 -0400

Doug asked:
>> ... Can someone
>> explain how to publish my non group scheduled entries using iTIP?
>
>The whole concept of 'schedule' implies with someone or something
>else - so who would you be scheduling it with?

Ok, probably a misphrased term to use in this group.  I was considering MY 
entire calendar (group entries and personal entries and reminders etc) to 
be my 'schedule' as in "How does your schedule look?" where you dont just 
consider those entries that involve you AND others but ALL your entries. I 
was using it in the sense of "a written or printed list, catalog, or inventory; also : TIMETABLE " rather than in the sense of "a procedural plan that indicates the time and sequence of each operation" or the process we are so intimately involved with.

>It looks to me as if you are saying - You want to transfer
>a non-scheduling iCalendar object, with a scheduling protocol.

Not quite.  Back up and reconsider the scenario I was using.  I have a 
calendar with 100 entries; 90 are 'group' entries Ive scheduled (Dougs 
mind set) with others, 10 are entries Ive put on my calendar to block out 
time and serve as reminders, place holders, etc.  The latter group has no 
ORGANIZER, the former group does.  As the CIO I want to publish my 
schedule so that my direct reports can see when Im booked and when Im not. 
 Using iTIP I can ONLY publish (yes PUBLISH) my 90 group entries.  I have NO way to publish my other 10 entries that are also part of my calendar!  So 
how would you suggest I publish those remaining 10?  Some other means 
besides iTIP means iTIP for publishing calendars has a loophole where not 
all my available data can be presented.

Is this a show stopper for now?  Nope.  Is it something that should be 
looked at eventually?  Yes.  We are updating 2445 and 2447 so why not 
2446??  'Nuf said on this topic and back to work...

Bruce
===========================================================================
Bruce Kahn                                INet: [email-masked]
Iris Associates                          Phone: 978.392.5335
Westford, MA, USA 01886                    FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...

---

From: Doug Royer <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 11:40:25 -0700

> was using it in the sense of "a written or printed list, catalog, or inventory; also : TIMETABLE " rather than in the sense of "a procedural plan that indicates the time and sequence of each operat…

I understand what you are doing. That is not what I am saying.

I am saying that we had MANY of these discussions with the MANY iTIP
drafts came out. And the WG decided iTIP was for scheduling.

If we are going to do something, it needs to be new work.

> 2446??  'Nuf said on this topic and back to work...

CAP address non-scheduling METHOD's, lets not invent yet another.

-Doug

---

From: Doug Royer <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:13:37 -0700

> 2446??  'Nuf said on this topic and back to work...

We are updating 2445 for two reasons:

	(1) Errors found during interoperability testing.

	(2) New items found as a result of the WG chartered CAP work.
	    It was felt (by the AD's? - Patricia/Bob?) that it
	    would be better when we release CAP to include any
	    changes (not additions) at the same time as item (1) above.

	    Their idea was that it was better to not confuse
	    people by incompatible specs.	   

So we are not adding to iCalendar, nor should we add to iTIP.
Is there a BUG list for iTIP?

I personally do not have a problem with extending the charter for SKiCal
or this new work. It's just currently out of scope if you read
the WG charter.

-Doug