IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [VCARDDAV] KIND in draft 15

Andy Mabbett <andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> Tue, 21 December 2010 11:34 UTC

Return-Path: <pigsotwing@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: vcarddav@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vcarddav@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C57D3A69C0 for <vcarddav@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 03:34:43 -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=[AWL=0.858, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6QYIsd5EffCQ for <vcarddav@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 03:34:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 191DB3A6948 for <vcarddav@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 03:34:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gyd12 with SMTP id 12so1749531gyd.31 for <vcarddav@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 03:36:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:to:content-type; bh=gjF9DQHEmkGAuYHC7LBANrH8TSHuBjwW7h0xODLgdno=; b=RsFYNCoWiMgICdCBVuJbt1cZBk/cAIo7WmNqhoC7WsdnzYMTNOVF3rajvAyITIJn7R qOJFCTSsJyqfboivT7MB8Cg4SHBGJcTVcyj4saglCvMACe8GsfbDqjjLnhAbn2VELYUf aJaZan22uYpNjQCRPVTyiK2CJ9XFecYsLADrc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type; b=KdmcfpcG0z+j7e3bE3HdA8mFe+vcAB9GuEOl4qjxX3Agx0EqGKEAvxCyxQmMFwqgBk Sbh5Y9GtkACnHGsMiQbNByGo8UIGeuFG8f6mJFzT5PYa9NRf7PMcNmVyLXzV1KPxXE5h TZqxa+7z61Pw0lwUjskgGLgoJMtu8QqI0rtVc=
Received: by 10.151.14.15 with SMTP id r15mr8064897ybi.390.1292931397633; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 03:36:37 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: pigsotwing@gmail.com
Received: by 10.150.178.11 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 03:35:56 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5C90ECF3EB063458C5F1692F@cyrus.local>
References: <AANLkTikckYf5A0rUZ6k=JN2UZwp+__bBFHndxbfLcEHK@mail.gmail.com> <4D0B6AC9.1080607@viagenie.ca> <4D0B83AE.4060601@stpeter.im> <AANLkTimA-AuKRoOm6ZRmqSTmOBzHkWCah52ezCJCmvVp@mail.gmail.com> <4D0FA8C9.7080201@viagenie.ca> <AANLkTimM2sAX3_4+Y2sBXuUxbWdRxpJ2bLq5Pq12pGOr@mail.gmail.com> <4D0FB317.1050004@viagenie.ca> <AANLkTim-026NEKwmEwHi6hY2BfTunny11q191+9Wdw+g@mail.gmail.com> <5B90C712-865E-4760-ACE4-451B063999C8@opengroupware.org> <9944D1A448E2AEEC76264B1F@cyrus.local> <AANLkTing1mcsJgD+W8+dkg9Sb=SkbfLNagHrYtCujMa2@mail.gmail.com> <5C90ECF3EB063458C5F1692F@cyrus.local>
From: Andy Mabbett <andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 11:35:56 +0000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 90FQRXyRP3Vjclvik2QdZlcCVXs
Message-ID: <AANLkTinHUBPF6ECVkwf17_1FB1K=vNbikptUPP=8_dNx@mail.gmail.com>
To: vcarddav@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Subject: Re: [VCARDDAV] KIND in draft 15
X-BeenThere: vcarddav@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF vcarddav wg mailing list <vcarddav.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav>, <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vcarddav>
List-Post: <mailto:vcarddav@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav>, <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 11:34:43 -0000

On 21 December 2010 02:55, Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name> wrote:

> CATEGORIES cannot be definitive if it just contains "names" which are not guaranteed
> to be unique. KIND/MEMBER is definitive in that they use unique IDs.

Surely, the issue with KIND: GROUP/LIST/ROBOT is not merely one of the
semantics of those terms, but of the functionality we wish to enable?

For example, someone mentioned the use-case of not auto-completing
with 'bot addresses. As Cyrus points out, such functionality would be
hard to provide, if all that is available is a category, which I have
called "ROBOT" but someone else has called "AUTOREPONDER", or some
other value.

Much of the above debate (with some exceptions, I acknowledge) seems
centre on the semantics, not the functionality. I think I for one
would find it easier to reach a conclusion as to the best course of
action, if arguments were based on the latter.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email