Re: [Fwd: CAP-12 - interm version 'A']

It does not change as long as you are changing just instance dates.
It only changes if you change the entire rule.

We were originally discussing changing instance dates.  My response was in 
that scope.
_____________________
Note: new email address

[email protected]



Doug Royer <[email protected]> 
Sent by: [email protected]
09/07/2003 02:33 PM
Please respond to
[email protected]


To
[email protected]
cc

Subject
Re: [Fwd: CAP-12 - interm version 'A']








[email protected] wrote:
> 
>  > With the RECURRENCE-ID issue you and Robert have changed your mind
>  > several times, yet claim
>  > he is the one that is pig headed. Your so arrogant you will not even
>  > admit that you changed your mind or opinion and you still slam him
 >  > with lies and insults. You started the RECURRENCE-ID issue by 
declaring
 >  > that it was fixed forever.  Now you say it changes with the set,
 >  > you changed your mind to be mostly compatible with the non-fixed
 >  > model, admit it and stop slamming him or anyone simply because
 >  > you changed your mind to agree with them.

> We did not change are minds.  The scope of the original discussion was 
> changing an instance of a repeat set.
> It was than asked is there ever a case where the recurrence-id's can be 
> reset.

Re-read the archives, You declared that it never changed.

You said on May 19:

 > I disagree, the recurrence-id must always refer to the original date.
 >
 > of the meeting.  Lets say i had a 5 day repeating meeting. However I 
invited > you to just Monday Tuesday to start with, but for some reason 
you 
have not
 > received the mail yet.
 > I now reschedule Thursday Friday to a later time in the day and add you
 > to the invitee list.
 > You now get a sequence 2 invite for Thursday Friday
 > Later you finally receive the meeting for Monday Tuesday with sequence 
of 1.
 > If I allow recurrence dates to reset on a reschedule, I can not tell if 
the 
 > Monday Tuesday invitee was rescheduled to Thursday Friday or if this is 
a
 > separate invite.

Now you claim that it changes under some circumstances.
And you have later admitted that because you got the sequence 2 before
the sequence 1 that you would know to do a REFRESH.

Marks comment is on the mark :-)


-- 

  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