Subject: Re: CHILD/PARENT vs RELATED-TO

From: "John Stracke" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:49:00 -0500

>If the UPN is not granted the right to modify the
>RELATED-TO property of the other VAGENDA components,
>then most likely these properties were not set by
>him to start with.  Thus, these properties should
>not be deleted by him (or by the CS on his behalf).

That doesn't automatically follow.  The person who set those properties in 
the first place was trying to add useful information to the system.  It is 
entirely reasonable for CAP to specify that the information should be 
deleted once it becomes useless.

/============================================================\
|John Stracke                    |Principal Engineer         |
[email-masked]   |Incentive Systems, Inc.    |
|http://www.incentivesystems.com |My opinions are my own.    |
|============================================================|
|In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is in therapy.|
\============================================================/

---

From: Bernard Desruisseaux <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:58:38 -0500

> deleted once it becomes useless.

I disagree.  I don't think it is reasonable for the
CS to decide when the information become useless.

I can set the RELATED-TO property of a VAGENDA to a
CALID that doesn't yet exists.  As such, the CS
should not delete, on its own, RELATED-TO property
set to CALID that don't exists.

Regards,
Bernard
-- 
Bernard Desruisseaux                    mailto:[email-masked]
Recherche et développement              Tél.  : +1 514 733-8500 x4213
Steltor                                 Fax   : +1 514 733-8878