"Last action" fields
dfaure at klaralvdalens-datakonsult.se
Thu Oct 7 17:28:02 CEST 2004
On Thursday 07 October 2004 15:08, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> We do not have last-action in the specs yet,
> so let us make some progress here.
> Please all says again if we should add this
> to the spec and you agree with it.
> Then David can add it.
I'm fine with adding it and ignoring it in Kontact, but that's probably not
what we want for full interoperability.
The real question is whether we need to change korganizer's invitation handling
or not. But I don't know enough about korganizer's invitation handling AND about
Outlook's invitation handling to provide any useful input.
> I was immedeately thinking about doing the last action per recipient,
> but it well might be that this modelling is enough.
This is even more detailed, more than Joon requested, so I'm guessing
Outlook (or the connector) can't do that?
> Note that Outlook will ask the user for this case and give a
> triple choice:
> Mail on the the new attendees.
> Mail all
> Do not mail the update.
> As explained before we cannot be sure to see all revisions of
> an event, because other clients might work on it.
> So I could imagine a comparision to the change date and the last-action-date
> that probably is a good hint.
Well, but we can't just make up algorithms as we want here, if this
is built into Outlook, can we?
> > The question is, obviously: do we need to generate such a number when
> > the first invitation is sent from kontact?
> > Does anyone know if (and where) this number is used in iTIP?
> No idea, maybe you can ask someone at kolab-devel and kdepim
> if they know more?
Asking a question about outlook's owner-appointment-id on kdepim?
Doesn't look like the right place to me.
I'm not on kolab-devel at the moment; should I be? (we really have too many lists...)
David Faure -- faure at kde.org, dfaure at klaralvdalens-datakonsult.se
Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, Platform-independent software solutions
More information about the format