[calsify] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5545 (6316)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 22 October 2020 18:28 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: calsify@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: calsify@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49B133A0A6E for <calsify@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GrvkMazzDfJL for <calsify@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6F4D3A0A62 for <calsify@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 41906F406F6; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:28:44 -0700 (PDT)
To: bernard.desruisseaux@oracle.com, superuser@gmail.com, barryleiba@computer.org, lear@cisco.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: murch@fastmail.com, calsify@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20201022182844.41906F406F6@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:28:44 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/calsify/LidYl6kcMJfmTnGYjYojkc_cYBs>
Subject: [calsify] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5545 (6316)
X-BeenThere: calsify@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <calsify.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/calsify>, <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/calsify/>
List-Post: <mailto:calsify@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/calsify>, <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 18:28:53 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5545,
"Internet Calendaring and Scheduling Core Object Specification (iCalendar)".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6316

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Ken Murchison <murch@fastmail.com>

Section: 3.8.5.1

Original Text
-------------
    Value Type:  The default value type for this property is DATE-TIME.
       The value type can be set to DATE.


Corrected Text
--------------
    Value Type:  The default value type for this property is DATE-TIME.
       The value type can be set to DATE.  This property MUST have the same
       value type as the "DTSTART" property contained within the
       recurring component.  Furthermore, this property MUST be specified
       as a date with local time if and only if the "DTSTART" property
       contained within the recurring component is specified as a date
       with local time.


Notes
-----
EXDATE excludes a specific instance of a recurring event and therefore should have the same value type as DTSTART.  This is analogous to RECURRENCE-ID which overrides a specific instance and has the same value type as DTSTART.

I will note however that there is iCalendar data in the wild with DTSTART;VALUE=DATE-TIME and EXDATE;VALUE=DATE.  If this errata is rejected as incorrect, then a new errata should be opened with additional text describing how EXDATE;VALUE=DATE is supposed to be handled when DTSTART;VALUE=DATE-TIME.  For instance, does EXDATE;VALUE=DATE exclude ALL instances of a FREQ=HOURLY recurrence on the given day?

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC5545 (draft-ietf-calsify-rfc2445bis-10)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Internet Calendaring and Scheduling Core Object Specification (iCalendar)
Publication Date    : September 2009
Author(s)           : B. Desruisseaux, Ed.
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Calendaring and Scheduling Standards Simplification
Area                : Applications
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG