Re: different calendar systems

[email protected]
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.calendar
Message-ID <[email protected]>
My 1.5 cents worth:

I believe that what we have is sufficient to implement different calendar 
systems, with a couple of small changes. In 10.7, the reply to the GET-
CAPABILITY command needs to include the CALSCALE property, with all of its 
values (not just the first) as a required item to return:

   cap-vreply     = "BEGIN" ":" "VCALENDAR" CRLF
                   ; The following properties may be in any order.
                   ;
                    prodid
                    version
                    reply-cmd
                    other-props
                    "BEGIN" ":" "VREPLY" CRLF
                    ; The following properties may be in any order.
                    ;
                    cap-version
                    car-level
                    components
                    calscale-props
                    stores-expanded
                    maxdate
                    mindate
                    itip-version
                    max-comp-size
                    multipart
                    query-level
                    recur-accepted
                    recur-expand
                    recur-limit
                    other-props
                    "END" ":" "VREPLY" CRLF
                   "END" ":" "VCALENDAR" CRLF

This change allows the other end of a CAP session to determine immediately if 
its partner supports as one of its CALSCALEs the scale that it wants to use. 
We can, as I read CAP, already use VQUERY with TARGET to determine if a 
particular VAGENDA has a particular scale. I'm undecided about whether we need 
to specifically add new words for certain periods of time, or not, to 
accomodate recurrence rules in other scales, but that I feel is an 
iCAL/RFC2445 issue and not a CAP issue per se. Recurrence rules and their 
grammar are already a complex issue, I'd rather not drag them into CAP.

Therefore, I propose that we change 10.7 to include the calscale-props as a 
required return to the GET-CAPABILITY command, and that we modify the example 
to reflect that by including a CALSCALE: GREGORIAN, HEBREW, JALALIL CRLF 
example. Do you all concur that this would help, and do you want to add this 
small change to CAP?

Tim Hare
Interested Bystander, non-inc.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.