priority specification

Till Adam till at
Tue Feb 28 09:02:10 CET 2006

On Monday 27 February 2006 13:28, Bernhard Reiter wrote:

> The possibility we propose is:
> p101) Save the priority as 10 values as RFC 2445 suggests:
>           0 = no priority selected
>           1-9 = priorities, with 1 being higest
> p102) The clients have a choice of how to display those ten values
>           in principle. If a mapping is used towards low,  middle,
> high, RFC2445 mapping must be used.
>          We suggest to use the mapping of RFC 2445 for
>  	  low, middle, high and "no selection" for all clients with
>           "no-selection" displayed and sorted as "middle" it not
> possible otherwise.
> p103) The clients shall preserve the saved value, even when
>            using a different mapping for display, if the priority is
> not changed.
> Joon, Till, Johannes:
> What do you think?

Sounds sensible to me. Will ask Reinhold, he changed it in Kontact a 
while ago, I believe.

Till Adam -- till at, adam at
Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, Platform-independent software solutions
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the format mailing list