Re: [Jmap] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-baum-jmap-tasks-00.txt

Neil Jenkins <neilj@fastmailteam.com> Thu, 11 March 2021 03:37 UTC

Return-Path: <neilj@fastmailteam.com>
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 C55563A0ADD for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 19:37:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.119
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.119 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmailteam.com header.b=BgQEOkES; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=cr/ObCX3
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 zjStMOV-ABvE for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 19:37:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C46A3A0ADB for <jmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 19:37:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E76E5C00CC for <jmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 22:37:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from imap41 ([10.202.2.91]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 10 Mar 2021 22:37:11 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= fastmailteam.com; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to :references:date:from:to:subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=9wTK3tK CLL9vlUsppwTVSb0magrHR/BZygNvto1SwDE=; b=BgQEOkESt82MVnsdHGnWJir QyfUW2WNQsIs1w14HSixHKEvSGl79abmCs9uJe3nBJT4nyUfymYLbE+73k8bUU95 Ht26RuuVjg+HEpzSFbsltaaQZInCmybo0vfV63BOZgEKcSZJOQneDbgr9sT+JtPp iGmar3bZkXyndECcu9SeJW0SgeQS+bt54DkXkRIu2VIjONP1qkp+bQYbAIUjw/5O ejuOCf+O7Lgu27NvuLiI0jsef8Hq2fjWEOR4AVx5Z7N7UttO3uTqjL9y9XfWPQat chngNiXmb49Lyqo/H2LJCdQ62wR/KYqN2PKC4vN7pBv7ucEiTt3ipoDM8iDNH+Q= =
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=9wTK3t KCLL9vlUsppwTVSb0magrHR/BZygNvto1SwDE=; b=cr/ObCX3BlXPfO5+ieKVrq imGO2wXTSin1JXbStwQqATmKIgg3w4Wy7Nqo4UwCBjzbsyomr77Y3lHxy6Wma0bE Z5TgtNhhJ+wIHzJs4PBpDYo/Yc2lNi1FwP6cPTAdgvnxHEwC0EFSZdUC/e7GPqjG pJ8ZOGu6G7A1Q4MA9MXlNSB9nuaPOUrmL/FZTZRzwNDyVEvH0mDCiKMm9grXoDHd YE8CWxdWIqdd6xSL2QLuDUP0E9C2rC9ISoSV/QQdfx/a6qZyCoPMoRoW49y5FL7+ Zv/s+JFNzwX6cyr5wXnBPv6Irvqq8nn8E4k3+Lmga4ynNFNO/0WS+DLXK1WKNiug ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:ZpBJYJXkj_4gCNysZofekF46sH4AYB9_hB5nlEnlZFuSzVHpe_Q7dg> <xme:ZpBJYJlN9OEIGREC1GBHGgJugJsnpjhxzoO2qy5oGDZcDqvpwYLwgn6RZDHRYt-u_ BGu9lE7W9wd-Q>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudduledgiedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesrgdtreerreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdfpvghi lhculfgvnhhkihhnshdfuceonhgvihhljhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlthgvrghmrdgtohhmqe enucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeehuefhudejtdeiveekvdfhfffgleeflefhfeekhefhkeel kefhfeeufeevffejieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrih hlfhhrohhmpehnvghilhhjodhmvghsmhhtphhouhhtghhoihhnghdqnhgvihhljheppehf rghsthhmrghilhhtvggrmhdrtghomhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdhfmh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:ZpBJYFbYKOGKZ581B52ye6CVlLn1oow1jfHUXNm3Jg4WY4KSNeZhaA> <xmx:ZpBJYMXM7NhII4kxVpyLSflztYzwjYEFF-Zi50CfDZq0ckIaOFzqrQ> <xmx:ZpBJYDnyq_STA3T-_U6koMnTMLqjUxv8ZVc1jrlhQ1D_MSaIbIP0nw> <xmx:Z5BJYPxsXlAFgm9IdpcszaOXKsEar9T9Wfvqo0wlolfaIJQFcwcjiA>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 8C80A260005D; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 22:37:10 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-206-g078a48fda5-fm-20210226.001-g078a48fd
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <bfc70e71-910b-44a8-a05c-1e78e26a944c@dogfood.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <b6d62630-1553-ff21-9dab-923251ba3f69@audriga.com>
References: <161191089978.17240.10563196389228010167@ietfa.amsl.com> <3dc39912-c432-1c4e-df09-b50da0ee738d@audriga.com> <b6d62630-1553-ff21-9dab-923251ba3f69@audriga.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 14:37:09 +1100
From: "Neil Jenkins" <neilj@fastmailteam.com>
To: "IETF JMAP Mailing List" <jmap@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=06d4a60b49ba4eae9493e66435f11883
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/i3bwdsVtLELttA-Buml9LSTaHW4>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_New_Version_Notification_for_draft-baum-?= =?utf-8?q?jmap-tasks-00=2Etxt?=
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: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 03:37:16 -0000

Thanks Joris! This is a great start, and reading through it I have a few thoughts for discussion at the imminent IETF 110 JMAP session and on the mailing list.

The biggest question is definitely whether we should merge this into the JMAP Calendars spec; copy pasting so much stuff is generally pretty unwieldy. I think it's still important that servers can choose to support one and no the other, but we can easily define multiple capabilities in the same spec. On the other hand, now sharing is split out we might be able to do most things by reference and not be too duplicative, in which case I still think separate specs is slightly cleaner.

Some other thoughts:
 * Many todo lists are a (manually) ordered series of tasks. I think supporting this is important; the way we generally do it in JMAP is to add a `sortOrder` property to the `Task` object (like we already have on the `TaskList` object).
 * Does it make sense for a `Task` to belong to multiple `TaskList`s? This interacts with the previous point; we would probably need to store a different sort order for each list it's in, which starts to get very unwieldy. Are there any existing task managers that do this, or is a task always in one list?
 * I'm not sure the `isVisible` property (copied over from Calendar) makes sense for TaskList.
 * The computed UTC properties for a Task need to be updated to map to task rather than event properties (e.g. `utcDue` for the due date).
Cheers,
Neil.