Subject: [calsify] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-calext-jscalendar-30: (with COMMENT)

From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 04:09:37 -0700

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-calext-jscalendar-30: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-calext-jscalendar/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

Thank you for this document.  I appreciate the effort to fix iCalendar and
jCal, but also support Ben's questions regarding how this document relates to
the iCalendar and jCal documents.  It seems that at least obsoleting jCal might
be a good idea.

Ben's detailed review also seemed to throw up quite a lot of
comments/clarifications, hence I have a slight concern about how robust the
jsCalendar specification is.  The shepherd write up also doesn't seem to note
what level of review has been received on this document.  The document states
that it aims to fix the bugs in iCalendar because they cannot be fixed without
breaking existing implementations.  I trust that the authors and WG are
confident that history is not about to repeat itself ...

Regards,
Rob