Re: [calsify] draft-ietf-calext-jscalendar-23

["Neil Jenkins" <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, 19 Feb 2020, at 06:44, Ken Murchison wrote:
> A few editorial nits:
> 
> 4.3.2.1, item 2, applying skip, item 1: I suggest adding a comma 
> between "given year" and "increment it" as I think it makes
> 
> 4.4.2: "Specifies how this property..." -> "Specifies how the calendar 
> object..."

Thanks, I've made these changes.

> Also, is there a particular reason the busy-unavailable and busy-tentative values from 5545 have been excluded?

Yes, because these are only relevant in the FREEBUSY type, which JSCalendar does not attempt to represent (like it does not represent VJOURNAL).

> Can I assume that the reason that a property that could be represented 
> as an array of items (e.g. roles) is instead represented as an object 
> with key=true items is that arrays can't be patched but items CAN be 
> removed from an object with a patch setting key=false?

It's key == `null` to remove, but yes this is the reason behind it.

Cheers,
Neil.