On Sep 11, 2010, at 10:20 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > I don't see any point in having a design conversation based on what might happen to future iterations of the design. I don't see the point in having a design conversation that isn't based on what might happen to the design. If the design is carved in stone, the conversation is no longer about design; it's about history. > It is of course possible, likely even that two variants of a syntax would diverge over time. At some point there will be a decision that future versions of the format will use only one of the syntaxes. Why wait, and further confuse the market? We can make that decision now. > Given the way that calendar applications behave, an incompatible format change would be no bad thing. In particular, calendar applications seem to have no idea that there is a difference between local time and UTC or that daylight savings rules vary with place. I don't know if there is also a problem in the iCal format, but the applications are certainly broken. Maybe you're using the wrong calendar applications. The ones I've used haven't had trouble with that. (and BTW, the format is iCalendar. iCal is a Macintosh application) Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf