Re: CAP-12-e: Alarms and SEQUENCE

Mark Smith <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.calendar
Message-ID <[email protected]> 
[email protected] wrote:

> Umm, no.  Given the text of MODIFY I see no demonstratable need to
> have a unique identifer on each alarm inside any component that
> already has a unique identifer.  MODIFY already says how to uniquely
> identify the bits to be changed (ie the VALARM) so _why_ do we need to
> misuse SEQUENCE?

You still propse to break MODIFY wihout any solution. No one
wants to break modify.

I do not know which version if any draft or published text you
have been reading, but I can not find ANY other unique identifier
for VALARMS. What is it?
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.