Re: [Fwd: Re: CAP-12-a: Stored queries still?]

[email protected] wrote:
> 
> Tim wrote on 09/03/2003 11:12:42 PM:
>  >                                                   I agree with Doug that
>  > there are queries which can be stored without need for  wild cards, 
> but I'm
>  > not sure I see where the efficiency comes in.
> 
> I think we all agree that not all stored querys need to use wildcards.  
> 
> If we consider the original intent of the feature, the current design 
> misses the mark and the efficiency for other cases is somewhat tenuous.

If you feel that is true, please post the 'original intent' as posted
to the WG.

>  >                                               Is it intended that the
>  > stored queries be on the Calendar Store machine, such that a
>  > smaller-footprint client can invoke them just by name, like a remote
>  > procedure call of some sort?
> 
> The original intent was to provide a means for clients to save on space 
> and cycles by not having to recraft commonly used queries and resend 
> them. 

And it does save both bandwidth and octets especially when you consider
the 2 sets of QUERY/FETCH required without them.

> Queries like "What alarms trigger in the next 10 minutes?" or "Is 
> there anything new for me to look at" or "What entries are on my 
> calendar for this morning/today?", etc.

If you feel that is a requirement, then submit a proposal.

> Its possible to craft and store uncommon or infrequently used queries 
> and save them away either locally or on the CS.   However making every 
> CS support this feature that does not fulfill the original intent is 
> something I have a concern about.  

You keep claiming the 'original intent' - yet my search of the archives
show that you did not attend the meetings where that was designed
or proposed. You simply do not want them which is a fair statement.
But you were not part of the 'original' design so you really are just
making up claims that have no foundation.

> CAP implcitly mandates every CS support stored queries: there is nothing 
> in CAP about how a CS can not support stored queries or how a CUA 
> detects this.

Bruce you have been on IETF mailing lists for a long time. You know
how it works. Complaining without submitting a proposal is something
that almost never works. If you want to have the ability to say
get me the alarms over the next 10 minutes - submit a proposal,
else - there is nothing to add.

-- 

  Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com
  -------------------------------|-----------------------------
  [email protected]                 | Office: (208)612-INET
  http://Royer.com/People/Doug   |    Fax: (866)594-8574
                                 |   Cell: (208)520-4044

                 We Do Standards - You Need Standards