Re: [calsify] RFC7986 and EMAIL parameter

[Neil Jenkins <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, 19 Feb 2021, at 14:23, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
> Can't we just use the URI scheme to determine the method? Why do we need 
> 'imip' and 'other' nested keys?

The reason for nested keys is that you might have multiple. For example, at some point I'd like to look again at standardising an HTTP protocol we can use between servers rather than having to keep using iMIP forever. To invite someone external, you would still start by sending an iMIP email, as otherwise we still have the identity problem (we don't know where your calendar is, we just have your email). However, the invitation can include a JSCalendar version as well as the iCalendar version (for backwards compat), and the JSCalendar `replyTo` property can have entries for both imip and also the new protocol. If the invitee's calendar supports it, it can "upgrade" to the new protocol by replying with that instead of iMIP. If not, the iMIP option is still there.

As to why the values have keys instead of just an array of URIs where you just look at the scheme, it's mainly because it's more ergonomic: if my app just supports iMIP, I'll just look for an imip key. If I support multiple, I can quickly check for their presence in order of my preferred priority without having to scan. And of course we could end up with multiple HTTP protocols although I agree it would probably be better to give these unique schemes.

Neil.