bernhard at intevation.de
Mon Oct 25 16:25:12 CEST 2004
On Monday 25 October 2004 13:36, David Faure wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 September 2004 01:19, Martin Konold wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 29. September 2004 00:25 schrieb David Faure:
> > > Then it could be
> > > annotation: /vendor/kolab/generate-freebusy (or something like that)
> > > attribute: value.shared
> > > value: true or false
> After more discussion we came up with the following idea instead:
> A calendar folder is either
> * not relevant for freebusy for anyone,
> * relevant for the owner of the folder only
> * relevant for anyone who can read the folder
> This would be modelled with an annotation /vendor/kolab/freebusy-relevant,
> where the attribute value.shared could have the values "none", "owner",
> "readers". By default, if the attribute isn't set, "owner" would be
> The question remains whether this is tied to alarms or not.
> In my opinion if a folder is freebusy-relevant for someone, then alarms
> must go off for that person, it's indeed the same setting. Either you're
> going to the meeting (then it's both fb-relevant and alarm-relevant) or
> you're just watching someone else's calendar (and then it's not fb-relevant
> for you neither alarm-relevant). The other person is going to the meeting,
> not you.
> OK with everyone?
Yes (also with your followup on the name of the annotation).
There is one question:
What about notes and tasks folders for which we would require a
similiar annotation, but only for reminders (aka alarms).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 2145 bytes
More information about the format