[VCARDDAV] vcardrev-12 sections 5.1, 5.5

["Javier Godoy" <[e-mail]>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Simon Perreault" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: [VCARDDAV] Issue in vcardrev-11 with LANGUAGE examples?


> On 2010-05-29 19:59, Markus Lorenz wrote:
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> I'm a bit confused about the first illegal example in section "5.1.
>> LANGUAGE".
>>
>> The description says:
>>
>>     Properties with different LANGUAGE parameters that represent the same
>>     data count as 1 toward cardinality and MUST have the same PID value
>>     if the PID parameter is used.  This is because there is logically a
>>     single property which is expressed in multiple languages.
>>
>> The legal examples is the following:
>>
>>       BIRTH;LANGUAGE=fr:Ville de Quebec
>>       BIRTH;LANGUAGE=en:Quebec City
>>
>> These LANGUAGE parameters represent the same data. Therefore they count
>> as 1 towards cardinality. If the PID is used it MUST have the same value
>> for both parameters, because they represent the same data. Inserting a
>> PID with value 1 to the legal example leads to this:
>>
>>       BIRTH;PID=1;LANGUAGE=fr:Ville de Quebec
>>       BIRTH;PID=1;LANGUAGE=en:Quebec City
>>
>> This is similar to the first _illegal_ example!
>
> Yes I'm confused as well. I can't find traces of how I got it this way. I
> think you're right. I'll change the example so that the two cases above are
> legal.
>
> Thanks,
> Simon
> -- 

In version 12, Section 5.1 reads [[
 Properties with different LANGUAGE parameters that represent the same
 data count as 1 toward cardinality and MUST have the same PID value
 if the PID parameter is used. This is because there is logically a
 single property which is expressed in multiple languages.

 Therefore, since BIRTH (Section 6.2.7) has cardinality (0,1), these
 two examples would be legal:

 BIRTH;LANGUAGE=en:Quebec City
 BIRTH;LANGUAGE=fr:Ville de Quebec

 BIRTH;PID=1;LANGUAGE=fr:Ville de Quebec
 BIRTH;PID=1;LANGUAGE=en:Quebec City
]]

(sorry, it seems I missed that message and it was the last about this issue)

I think the second example is illegal because Section 5.5 requires the PID
parameter MUST NOT appear on properties that may have only one instance per
vCard, and Section 6 defines cardinality (0,1) as "exactly one instance per
vCard MAY be present".

This is inconsistent: if PID were allowed, both properties would be considered
"different instances", which is not possible in this case because of the (0,1)
cardinality; on the other hand, the PID param must not appear if both
properties are understood as "a single property" (which in turn agrees with
the cardinality).

The definition of cardinality that we adopted emphasizes that every occurrence
of BIRTH represents the same birthplace, which is different from the case of
ORG (where the cardinality is 0..n because the name of several organizations
may be given in different languages).

Note also that the ABNF for BIRTH-param doesn't include a pid-param
alternative, thus rendering the example illegal even if 5.5 is redefined..

If the example is intended to be legal, the requirement in 5.5 should be
reworded, and maybe pid-param should be allowed where language-param is
allowed (otherwise the "legal" example wouldn't conform the ABNF).

I have a slight preference towards reverting this change and defining the 
example as "illegal" again, not only because it's easier to understand (and 
needs less modifications to what we have already agreed), but also because 
allowing PID for this case doesn't address any requirement.


Best Regards

Javier