Subject: Default TARGET

From: "Craig Johnson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 17:27:08 -0600

In the current draft the ABNF for TARGET indicates it is optional.  From
Section 2:    ; These are optional, and may occur more
   ; than once.
   ;
   target / other-props )This definition allows TARGET to be absent
from commands where it is not needed (GET-CAPABILITY, GENERATE-UID,
etc.).  The definition also allows TARGET to be absent when a TARGET
might be expected (CREATE, SEARCH, DELETE, MODIFY).  Nothing in the
draft requires TARGET to be present for these commands; but without a
TARGET these commands are useless. Taking advantage of this...  it would
be convenient in the absence of a TARGET to infer the current
authenticated UPN as the TARGET (if the UPN maps to a calendar on the
CS).  Doing so facilitates a common CUA / CS interaction: a user
accessing his own calendar.  For example: suppose at the beginning of my
workday I authenticate through my CUA to my CS as UserA.  Subsequently,
my CUA might issue a series of interactions to obtain current calendar
information:    Begin:VCalendar   Version:2.0   Prodid://SomeCUA  
Cmd;id=GetTodaysAppts:Search   Begin:VQuery   . . .   End:VQuery  
End:VCalendar Since there is no TARGET, the CS would assume
TARGET:UserA.  Ensuing CAP operations (CREATE, DELETE, etc) could also
make this assumption.  We have implemented this behavior in a
preliminary CAP implementation and found it to be useful and convenient.
How does the working group feel about defaulting the TARGET in this
manner? Or should TARGET always be explicit?  Either way, the draft
needs adjustment to clarify the issue. C Johnson

---

From: Doug Royer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 18:29:55 -0600

I think it is a great idea. However I would like it to be
"the 'UPN's default calendar" not not specifically say it must
be named to match the UPN. This makes virtual hosting easier.

   Example:

  		UPN:  [email-masked]
		CALID: [email-masked]

		CAP://Royer.com/[email-masked]   A bit ugly?

   I may wish the UPN to be [email-masked]' and yet
   have my calendar named 'Doug':

		UPN: [email-masked]
		CALID: Doug

		CAP://Royer.com/Doug

   And depending on the implementations model of virtual hosting
   it may or might not allow 'Doug' to be overloaded across
   virtual hosts, per UPN within distinct domains.

So could we say?:

   If TARGET is not supplied then the implied target is the
   currently authenticated UPN's default calendar. The name
   of any UPNs default calendar is an administrative and policy
   issue that is not defined in this memo.

I also think this would make L10N CALID's easier when the UPN
is expected to be the same as their MAILTO URL and then their
CALID could still be their 8-bit localized name (url-ized to
be a valid url).

Craig Johnson wrote:
> Section 2:
> ...
> manner? Or should TARGET always be explicit?  Either way, the 
> draft needs adjustment to clarify the issue.
> 
>  
> 
> C Johnson
> 

-- 

  Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com
  -------------------------------|-----------------------------
  [email-masked]                 | Office: (208)612-INET
  http://Royer.com/People/Doug   |    Fax: (866)594-8574
                                 |   Cell: (208)520-4044

                 We Do Standards - You Need Standards