[calsify] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-calext-jscalendar-30: (with COMMENT)

[Warren Kumari via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-calext-jscalendar-30: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-calext-jscalendar/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for writing this document -- as someone who has written (horrible!)
code to try and generate and parse iCalendar data, this seem like a very useful
effort. Like Eric I'm concerned about the https://xkcd.com/927/  effect, but I
also feel that this standard might be more usable than the existing one(s). I
suspect that it is much too early to think about Obsoleting jCal (although I
must admit I've never run into jCal, so I have no idea if it is actually being
used).

I think that it would be useful to have some more discussions around why / when
PatchObjects should be used - they seem to add significant complexity to the
design, and I'm really not convinced that the complexity outweighs the benefit;
I'm guessing that I'm simply not fully understanding their utility. More
examples would probably help...

Thanks again!
W