IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jcardcal] Genart LC review: draft-ietf-jcardcal-jcal-09

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 20 March 2014 23:24 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: jcardcal@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jcardcal@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3243E1A07F9; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 16:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 tGWwgpfdi0o4; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8BA61A0453; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 16:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aither.local (unknown [24.8.184.175]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 111534010C; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:24:02 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <532B7892.6070808@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:24:02 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Philipp Kewisch <kewisch@gmail.com>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
References: <531F5C0D.5040903@nostrum.com> <532B5066.5050803@gmail.com> <532B69C8.305@nostrum.com> <532B6CFE.9020707@qti.qualcomm.com> <532B73E4.1060101@stpeter.im> <532B7852.4060104@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <532B7852.4060104@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jcardcal/JEFt7DTtsZtTwZFohVv6a5zg7aU
Cc: draft-ietf-jcardcal-jcal@tools.ietf.org, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, jcardcal@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Jcardcal] Genart LC review: draft-ietf-jcardcal-jcal-09
X-BeenThere: jcardcal@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: JSON data formats for vCard and iCalendar WG <jcardcal.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jcardcal>, <mailto:jcardcal-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/jcardcal/>
List-Post: <mailto:jcardcal@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jcardcal-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jcardcal>, <mailto:jcardcal-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 23:24:17 -0000

On 3/20/14, 5:22 PM, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
>
> On 3/21/14, 12:04 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> On 3/20/14, 4:34 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
>>> Hmm....I wonder why neither RFC 5545 nor this document reference RFC
>>> 3339 instead of ISO 8601? That would get you all of the ABNF you need.
>>
>> That's a good point. RFC 3339 is, IMHO, nicely clear and tightly
>> scoped compared to ISO 8601 (which leaves quite a few options open).
>> However, even when referencing RFC 3339 it's important to document all
>> the details about various options, such as use of non-UTC time zones
>> and fractional seconds.
> While rfc3339 is more closely scoped than ISO 8601, there are still
> various options that require documenting, which is why I decided to stay
> with ISO8601. For consistency with jCard I think it would be unwise to
> change the rfc the date format is based now.

Yes, I do think consistency between jCard and jCal is more important in 
this instance.

Peter

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email