Subject: Re: logical model of reoccurrence

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 12:02:33 -0500

Greg, what do you mean by migration from mime-directory to RDF and XML. 
Are you talking about SkiCal?  Or RFC2445?  Right now we are not working 
on a migration.  We have a document that shows an XML schema that rests on 
"top of" RFC2445.  But it's not a replacement or migration.
___________________
Patricia Egen Consulting
www.egenconsulting.com
423-875-2652

"Greg FitzPatrick" <[email-masked]>
Sent by: [email-masked]
11/08/01 09:09

        To:     <[email-masked]>
        cc: 
        Subject:        logical model of reoccurrence

Here is the URL to the paper I am giving in a session together with Libby
Miller at XML2001 in Orlando.

The aim of the paper is to formalize a logical and mnemonic model for the
representation of Temporal information.

The model, which we are calling Orlando, is evolved from the iCal RFC2445
datetime and datetime reoccurrence rules.

In our migration from mime-directory to XML and RDF, it is important that 
we
identify the incongruities discovered in the RFC2445 reoccurrence rules 
and
make sure that we just don't pass these problems on unsolved.

Other problems addressed are:

Unambiguous identification of end-inclusive/end-exclusive interval
representation.

Unambiguous identification of periods.  Are they duration specific ( the
exact amount of days of seconds) or are they calendar specific (landing on
some exact point on a wall clock or calendar?

Any comments are appreciated and serious goofs unearthed will earn you a
beer at the next IETF.

the link is:

http://skical.org/orlando/

Greg

---

From: "Greg FitzPatrick" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:00:44 +0100

Sorry - I was not very clear.  The RDF calendaring group is using  iCal as a
base for their work.  Migrating is perhaps a poor choice of words - but when
they are done the results will not be pure RFC2445.  From my mail one could
get the impression that the CALSCH WG was "migrating" which if course is not
the case. My apologies

On the other hand I believe that the Orlando model is significant for even
those who are not migrating. So I hope several of us will get a chance to
read it.

The first beer goes to Graham Klyne who discovered the first typo "
>You say: Greg(2020) OR OFFSET(P1Y) = Greg(2021//2022)

> and I don't see any reasonable definition that gives you that result.

The correct example should read

Greg(2020) OR OFFSET(P1Y) = Greg(2020//2022),
  -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
  Från: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
  Skickat: Thursday, November 08, 2001 6:03 PM
  Till: Greg FitzPatrick
  Kopia: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
  Ämne: Re: logical model of reoccurrence

  Greg, what do you mean by migration from mime-directory to RDF and XML.
Are you talking about SkiCal?  Or RFC2445?  Right now we are not working on
a migration.  We have a document that shows an XML schema that rests on "top
of" RFC2445.  But it's not a replacement or migration.
  ___________________
  Patricia Egen Consulting
  www.egenconsulting.com
  423-875-2652

  the link is:

  Greg