Hi Ned,
--On September 10, 2010 7:48:26 AM -0700 Ned Freed <ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com>
wrote:
Unfortunately, now that I've had a chance to look at
draft-daboo-et-al-icalendar-in-xml-06.txt a little more, I find that it
doesn't do this well. For example, instead of mapping a property like
dtstamp to something like:
<property name="dtstart">
<date-time>20080205T191224Z</date-time>
</property>
it maps it to:
<dtstamp><date-time>20080205T191224Z</date-time></dtstamp>
This means that additional properties will necessitate a schema update.
Not good, and I believe this needs to be fixed.
There was a lot of debate over the choice of element names vs element
attributes to name the iCalendar data objects. Really the key to your
argument is whether or not it is vital to be able to validate the XML via
the schema - I think our contention was that was not a requirement. More
important is validating the semantics of the calendar data (e.g. DTEND
always >= DTSTART, ORGANIZER always present in iTIP messages) and I believe
no one is going to want to do that via the XML schema.
If you feel strongly about this I suggest you bring this issue up on the
vCardDAV WG mailing list wrt to the vcard-in-xml spec which uses the same
design as icalendar-in-xml. If there is agreement there to change, then we
would likely re-align icalendar-in-xml to match.
--
Cyrus Daboo
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf