Subject: Re: SKICal CONTROL

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 13:14:46 -0500

John replied:
> Isn't ROLE just for ATTENDEEs? The CONTROL might not be an
> ATTENDEE.

Actually its not restricted to ATTENDEEs.  We defined it separately from 
the ATTENDEE definition and as such there is nothing precluding another 
property from also having it.  The actual definition from 2445 says:

4.2.16 Participation Role

   Parameter Name: ROLE

   Purpose: To specify the participation role for the calendar user
   specified by the property.

It does not say "specified by the ATTENDEE property value" or any variant 
of that.  It is a property parameter that, until now, has not been needed 
or logical for other properties besides ATTENDEE.  It does make sense for 
CONTROL and for SKiCAL it may also make sense to have new values for some 
ATTENDEEs (but thats up to SKiCAL to define clearly).

Bruce
===========================================================================
Bruce Kahn                                INet: [email-masked]
Iris Associates                          Phone: 978.392.5335
Westford, MA, USA 01886                    FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...

---

From: "Shannon J. Clark" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 13:09:17 -0600

Should the standard state exactly which parameters can be attached to which
properties?

If we don't I suspect we will see some serious interoperability issues -
especially since these will be cases of "standard" parameters being used in
various places - vs. the less serious case of X-* parameters or properties
which each system should be written to ignore if it doesn't understand.

So, should we state somewhere which parameters can optionally be used by
which properties?

Shannon

Shannon J. Clark
CEO - JigZaw, Inc
1.800.4.JIGZAW (454.4929)
[email-masked]
www.jigzaw.com

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 12:15 PM
To: John Stracke
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: SKICal CONTROL

> Isn't ROLE just for ATTENDEEs? The CONTROL might not be an

Actually its not restricted to ATTENDEEs.  We defined it separately from the
ATTENDEE definition and as such there is nothing precluding another property
from also having it.  The actual definition from 2445 says:

  Parameter Name: ROLE

It does not say "specified by the ATTENDEE property value" or any variant of
that.  It is a property parameter that, until now, has not been needed or
logical for other properties besides ATTENDEE.  It does make sense for
CONTROL and for SKiCAL it may also make sense to have new values for some
ATTENDEEs (but thats up to SKiCAL to define clearly).

Bruce