event XML 1.1 (fix recurrances)

Martin Konold martin.konold at erfrakon.de
Fri Jan 26 00:42:53 CET 2007

Am Donnerstag, 18. Januar 2007 09:51 schrieb Joon Radley:  

Hi Joon,

> The modification of attendees and attachments creates a new object, even
> though the Outlook GUI hides this from you. The linking between these
> objects has changed and has given problems since its introduction in
> Outlook XP. In Outlook 2003 SP2 has this issue stabilized. I have no idea
> yet if this works he same in Outlook 2007.
> So basically if you introduce those 2 tags in he sub event it basically
> becomes impossible to reliability convert between Outlook and Kolab-XML.

I don't understand this. 

Assuming that this separation does happen.

How do you deal with this problem in your current version of the Toltec 

I will try to explain it with a realistic use-case:

1. Alice enters a weekly recurring event with attendees in the calendar of her 
boss Bob using OL/Toltec Connector.

2. This event is synchronized to the Kolab server using the old XML format.

3. Bob, who happens to be a KDE Kontact user is reading/synchronizing his 
calendar folder.

4. Alice then changes one attendee for the third occurance in Outlook. (To my 
knowledge Toltec Connector does not prevent the user from doing this and this 
operation is offered by the Outlook GUI to the user)

5. From an Outlook and Alice's end users point of view the operation (changing 
an attendee) was perfectly legal and successful. After all this change is 
reflected correctly in the user interface.

6. According to your observations the newly created exception is now separated 
("creates a new object") from the original recurring event.

7. Then Toltec Connector tries to synchronize the modified event including its 
recurrance rules and its newly introduced exception date to the server

Q1: How does the Toltec Connector deal with this situation today? 

Q2: How is step 4 expressed in the generated XML using todays Kolab XML 

Q3: What will KDE Kontact see after step 7?

Q4: In which respect is the old format superior to the new proposal?

> He has somehow published
> a new standard of the Kolab-XML format that totally breaks interoperability
> between the existing clients.

How does the new format break interoperability? 

(I claim that assuming your observations are correct that the interoperability 
was already broken before!)

-- martin

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 mailing list