Re: Status of the CALSCH working group (Alarms/SEQUENCE)

[email protected] wrote:

>
> Mark noted on 11/10/2003 08:46:22 PM:
> > ICAL disallows two identical vevents because the uid distinguishes
> > them. And ICAL defines if they have the same uid, then they are the same
> > object in a possible different state or time.
>
> Actually the prohibition is on concurrent repeat instances which are 
> actually identified using both UID and RECURRENCE-ID but in a nutshell 
> this is basically it.
>
> > ICAL does not disallow vevents that would be identical except for the
> > unique identifier.
>
> Yep.  (See, Mark and I dont always disagree.)
>
> Lets not forget that CAP currently has a prohibition on creating 
> duplicate BOOKED instances (CAP-12-e, p19):
>
>    There MUST NOT BE more than one "BOOKED" state object in a calendar
>   for the same "UID".

The SUBJECT is Alarms/SEQUENCE ???

No one disputes that VEVENTS must  have a unique ID.

-- 

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

               We Do Standards - You Need Standards