ws-calendar — archive

[Michael Douglass]

The statement might be something along the lines of; Implementations claiming conformance to this standard, MUST implement, at a minimum, all mandatory requirements and provisions set forth in Sections 2 through 14. If such implementations claim conformance to any OPTIONAL requirements and provisions stated in those sections, these requirements and provisions MUST be implemented as set forth. In addition all calendar data MUST conform to the restrictions specified in RFC 5545 and related RFCS with exceptions specified below. Systems implementing this protocol MUST ensure they preserve the consistency of the data as regards those specifications. In particular: * All date and date-time values MUST remain consistent when updated. * Recurrence exceptions and instances MUST remain consistent when updated. * Alarm triggers are related to start or end of their enclosing component. The relationship MUST remian valid on update. Timezone specification Conforming applications MAY express date-time values as UTC but SHOULD use the TZID parameter to provide an unambiguous local time. In contrast to RFC5545 section 3.2.19 timezone specifications SHOULD NOT be included when a timezone identifier is specified with a TZID parameter. Conforming applications will make use of a timezone service or a previously agreed upon set of timezones. Unrecognized data elements Conforming applications SHOULD ignore elements of calendar data they do not recognize. Extensions ? -- Mike Douglass douglm@rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer Communication & Collaboration Technologies 518 276 6780(voice) 2809 (fax) Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 110 8th Street, Troy, NY 12180