Subject: Re: Cap Free-Busy Request; some compelling thoughts

From: "Craig Johnson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 13:12:37 -0600

J Stracke wrote:
 
>  OK, then, whether you ask for it by one type of request or another
is not something users will care about.
 
On the contrary, from our experience users/customers DO care. 
Strongly.  The preference is VFREEBUSY request over VQUERY request. 
Just allow both.  Everyone will be happy.

---

From: Doug Royer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:00:17 -0600

> Just allow both.  Everyone will be happy.

Users will not have a clue how the protocol is implemented. They
never see it. And as dynamically creating VFREEBUSY components
will involve exactly the same code ether way, then wrapped with
a CAP reply (which ever format is chosen) - I do not buy the
argument that one is faster than the other in any measurable way.

So for clarity, I am proposing that for CSs that do support
'RECUR EXPAND' and do support "VFREEBUSY":

    QUERY: SELECT * FROM VFREEBUSY
     WHERE dtstart >= start range
     AND dtend <= enduring

  The value of STATE is irrelevant as they are only created
  dynamically. And if STATE is supplied it MUST be ignored.

Then all queries for any components are exactly the same.

-- 

  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