Re: [Jmap] Proposal: split sharing mechanism from JMAP Calendars spec

Jim Fenton <fenton@bluepopcorn.net> Tue, 15 December 2020 17:28 UTC

Return-Path: <fenton@bluepopcorn.net>
X-Original-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A88D3A1275 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 09:28:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=bluepopcorn.net
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 RGp_HlKiEsmm for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 09:28:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from v2.bluepopcorn.net (v2.bluepopcorn.net [IPv6:2607:f2f8:a994::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 626313A1274 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 09:28:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bluepopcorn.net; s=supersize; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=esaB9gPYiRODVlMACa1/4tr0OlUmcXyBJ/ujow3rxYk=; b=cVj7norqqf5I888Uq3fQfUMjTK FahjE4K6BzVxsCVCXRIptxBmfWSd4IVbEa4CXwMVAGlc5/x6tHFTHsnxa0Aoq7xVThXD1syv7nTYP Z8KvrzpPYPdCv+MvtEyAjlfgf3qBWoT136T56NxBDf0XashThhBASTCyrw4YV1daIc3o=;
Received: from [2601:647:4400:1261:b4c6:391:b787:7e04] (helo=[10.10.20.144]) by v2.bluepopcorn.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <fenton@bluepopcorn.net>) id 1kpE7J-0003EN-Dy; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 09:28:06 -0800
From: "Jim Fenton" <fenton@bluepopcorn.net>
To: "Neil Jenkins" <neilj@fastmailteam.com>
Cc: "IETF JMAP Mailing List" <jmap@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 09:28:04 -0800
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673)
Message-ID: <6F004CB0-62ED-46B3-A06E-D3A6B608B92B@bluepopcorn.net>
In-Reply-To: <1e765f38-5a7a-4498-ab6a-8361671713f5@beta.fastmail.com>
References: <1e765f38-5a7a-4498-ab6a-8361671713f5@beta.fastmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/Y1j8YE-IM61K42sb_aK0azT0cUk>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] Proposal: split sharing mechanism from JMAP Calendars spec
X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol <jmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/jmap/>
List-Post: <mailto:jmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 17:28:13 -0000

On 14 Dec 2020, at 22:01, Neil Jenkins wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> The JMAP Calendars draft-in-progress currently defines the 
> CalendarPrincipal and CalendarShareNotification data types under a 
> separate capability. Looking at it, I have come to the conclusion that 
> we should go a step further: drop "Calendar" from the names and split 
> them out into their own spec. These are really generic sharing 
> primitives that could then be referenced by the other specs — e.g. 
> calendars, tasks, mail sharing — to define how you share data of 
> types between entities within a system in a consistent way.
>
> Please reply with any comments, questions, objections, or agreement 
> with the proposal and I will write up a draft splitting out these data 
> types to propose for acceptance.

I definitely think that would be useful. For example, my wife and I 
would like to have a shared contact list.

-Jim