Re: [VCARDDAV] vcarddav-birth-death-extensions update

[Cyrus Daboo <[e-mail]>]

Hi Barry,

--On November 23, 2011 1:38:04 PM -0500 Barry Leiba 
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> OK, given Simon's and Cyrus's comments, it seems that both of these
> changes are too much to deal with post-IESG-approval.  I think the
> best thing to do is pull the changes back out, and leave the approved
> version.
>
> It's too bad that we didn't leave things open for broader use of the
> "ADR" property style.  Maybe we should have created a value type of
> "address", defined as the semicolon-delimited string that's in ADR.
> Then we could have applied it in ADR, and wherever else it might later
> make sense.  Alas, we don't have that, so we're stuck.
>
> Let's keep that in mind for future extensions and other changes: don't
> put special-case parsing into value=text; instead, create value types
> for the structured data.

Another option: how about instead of BIRTHPLACE as a property, we could use 
ADR with a TYPE=birthplace? I suspect that may be too radical in that 
existing clients will present it as a "valid" mailing address that could 
get confused with others. But it seems reasonable to me that any property 
that needs to look like an "ADR" value out to simply be ADR with a specific 
type...

A question: is there really no URI scheme for a mailing address? Should 
there be one?

-- 
Cyrus Daboo