Re: [calsify] New Draft - Maintenance Notifications Using iCalendar

[Doug Royer <[e-mail]>]

On 7/16/19 10:17 AM, Ryan Gunter [Masked] wrote:
> Preview: Ken / All, Thank you very much for the help. This is my first --> SPAM? CLICK to BLOCK <https://dnt.abine.com/#/block_email/[e-mail]/[e-mail]>
> 
> This email is Masked using Blur - it was sent from ietf.org to [e-mail] (your reply stays Masked). To protect your privacy <https://www.abine.com/faq.html#caniaddcc>, do not forward this message, or add new recipients like CCs or BCCs.
> 
> Thanks for being a Blur customer! If you haven't yet, [ Try DeleteMe at a discount. <https://joindeleteme.com/?utm_campaign=blur-offer&utm_source=masked-email-header> ]
> 
> Ken / All,
> 
> Thank you very much for the help.  This is my first IETF process so I'm still learning.
> 
> Our team has been discussing the options, and the STRUCTURED-DATA field might be better fit for our network maintenance use case.  Has there been any discussion about coding support / libraries / tooling for this property? Also, the draft indicates using standardized schemas from schema.org <http://schema.org> or hosting your own is acceptable, however we were curious if there were any thoughts on storing schemas specifically for STRUCTURED-DATA?

Is this a workflow process that involves scheduling? Or are you looking for an XML/HTML (schema.org) web page solution? A massive percentage of the schema.org schemas are CSS or HTML content.

 From the NANOG mailing list, it looked as if you wanted to automatically track a log of calendaring events (past or future) and have a standard way to describe and parse the description to keep track of what was done or needs to be done. (looks like calendaring/scheduling to me)

If your content is primarily for automated display (html or otherwise) of data, then maybe schema.org web content will be what you want.

If your content is for processing and work flow (that may be displayed), then you may want an iCalendar (or other type) object.

The two are not incompatible, as schema.org ties to MIME-types (attachments). - See the schema.org contentType as one example. Structured-Data has no benefit over ATTACH. I think people misunderstand the ATTACH property.

The W3C (schema.org) and the IETF are in agreement on object identifiers. Schema.org allows for the definition of data sets, and they are tied to mime types when sent as separate, non-web-page objects.

Don't over complicate your data set. Define it, then map it to agreed on names, value types, and when needed specific acceptable values. Then decide if its values are primarily web-page-content, or a stand alone transported objects. And if stand alone objects tied to calendar date/time, then keep with the same format and do not invent another one, it will just complicate parsers.



-- 

Doug Royer - (http://DougRoyer.US)
[e-mail]
714-989-6135