Question: Individual annotations vs One large annotation (conceptual riddle for the interested)
Georg C. F. Greve
greve at kolabsys.com
Tue Oct 11 14:37:28 CEST 2011
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 13.16:31 Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
> I have strong -and in my opinion very valid, and blocking- objections
> against using multiple or separate annotations, so I'm confused as to
> why we are still discussing this.
Because you are the only one who thinks these are serious objections and you
have failed to convince anyone else on this list of your viewpoint thus far.
Your argument is further weakened by the standard practice having been to use
one annotation per use case in the past, and the Kolab server has made good
experiences with that.
So you're arguing modification of standard practice on the grounds of issues
that you expect to arise from such standard practice which in practice have
At the same time your new approach has evident drawbacks in overhead and
superfluous use of bandwidth that impact all clients and have given rise to
concerns for everyone who spoke up on this issue thus far.
> No other alternatives have been provided, no blocking objections exist
> against using one annotation.
The alternative is to continue the standard best practice that has worked well
for Kolab for the past years: One annotation per use case.
No blocking objections exist against continuing best practice, and no strong
argument exists for changing the approach, while the suggested change in
standard practice will not only require changing existing applications, thus
incur overhead, there is also disadvantages that people are concerned about.
In such a situation, "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" typically prevails.
Georg C. F. Greve
Chief Executive Officer
Kolab Systems AG
e: greve at kolabsys.com
t: +41 78 904 43 33
pgp: 86574ACA Georg C. F. Greve
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 308 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the format