event XML 1.1 (fix recurrances)
martin.konold at erfrakon.de
Thu Feb 8 07:32:39 CET 2007
Am Mittwoch 07 Februar 2007 schrieb Joon Radley:
> migration is a major undertaking and I needs to be worked out to the very
> last detail. I do understand that migration is not a big issue to you, but
> for us it is.
I plan that the improved Kolab XML Format is backwards compatible with the
The basic idea is that older clients will not be confused by the newer version
of the format and vice versa.
IMHO this was part of the idea to use XML instead of some other home grown
> If you feel that there is just no way you can wait, please define the sub
> events in the root of the object so that they stay preserved by Toltec.
What does this mean? What do you mean with "root of the object"?
Does this mean that Toltec is not conforming to Chapter 1.2. of the current
Kolab XML format definition?
"If a client sees a tag it does not understand, this tag must be preserved and
saved back to the file."
The idea of the new improved Kolab XML format is to allow to fix the
recurrance problem of the current format in a backwards compatible way while
leverageing on the above "preservation propery" of the spec.
So I assume that provided Toltec is conforming to the old spec it should have
no problems with the new spec. It should just keep on functioning as before
without any migration efforts.
The effort for you only happens as soon as you want to benefit from the
improved format. E.g. if you want to be able to store the changed list of
attendendees for a subevent of a recurring event.
There is no case where you loose anything if some other client already uses
the new format instead of the old format. You are still able to get the same
information using your old XML parser from the new format.
Please explain to me what you can loose with a new format provided it is
e r f r a k o n
Erlewein, Frank, Konold & Partner - Beratende Ingenieure und Physiker
Sitz: Stuttgart - Partnerschaftsregister Stuttgart PR 126
More information about the format