Re: [calsify] SKIP was Re: AD review of draft-ietf-calext-rscale-03

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

>> If we rely on the calendar implementations to do the right thing with
>> respect to the particular calendars, then one implementation's bugs
>> don't spread.
>
> But provided the "buggy" data is represented consistently by all clients,
> users do have a reasonable chance of spotting the mistake and correcting it.
> On the other hand, if an event looks right on my mobile device, but is
> interpreted differently on my calendar-aware thermostat (or perhaps more
> seriously a medical device) I probably have no chance of spotting the error
> because the device might not expose its "internal" calendar view. So I would
> much rather the data be interpreted consistently across all devices even if
> its was not exactly what I wanted.

OK, and Grisha says the same thing in his response.

I'm still not happy with the situation, but as it's not clear that we
can do better, I'll consider my issue discussed, and let you guys
decide what the final settings should be.

Thanks for discussing this with me.

Barry