Re:

Doug asked on 08/28/2003 06:40:37 PM:
> >  >                                                    but the last 
sentence
> >  > definitely says that RECURRENCE-ID changes, and the wording and 
order is
> >  > such that it implies that this happens for an instance change.
> > 
> > This last sentence is the only text in iCalendar or iTIP that says 
> > RECURRENCE-ID changes.  Its contrary to the text immediately above it, 

> > to the text in iCalendar and to all the logic in elsewhere in iTIP 
> > describing workflow sequencing and recovery.
> 
> So do you also claim that Derik's and Frank's recient post also
> is in error when it says they change? Where they in error again?

Not at all.  If you actually read what both I and they wrote you will find 
they are agreement.  They wrote:

4) It is worth noting that those discussion in the related WG email 
threads referring to examples in iTIP are problematic, as section 3 of 
RFC2446 was intended to be illustrative text and was not reviewed as 
thoroughly as other sections of the RFC for consistency with iCalendar 
semantics or conformity to iTIP normative sections. This text defines a 
set of examples, or informational material. Further, this text is known to 
have numerous typographic errors.

and I agree.  I was merely pointing out that the ONLY conflicting text 
cited so far is the last line of 3.7.1 that Tim referred to (the rest 
jives just fine w/iCalendar and the rest of iTIP).   You (and Chris) seem 
to be the only ones who think this single line in the _semantics_ RFC has 
some kind of fiat over the _defintion_ RFC in defining the behaviour of 
the property and is allowed to redefine the property instead of provide 
semantics to it.

Even if you ignore the prose in iCalendar, all the other text in iTIP and 
the recent posting by Frank/Derik, the analysis of how both models perform 
still stands and is still accurate despite wishes to the contrary: the 
delta model performs poorly or can totally break down when message 
missequencing  or loss occurs, the fixed model does not. 

Bruce
===========================================================================
Bruce Kahn                                INet: 
[email protected]
Messaging & Collaboration                 Phone: 978.399.6496
IBM Software Group                         FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...