W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ietf-w3c@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Coordination issue: vCard, iCalendar vs JavaScript contact and calendaring APIs

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:18:15 +0000
Message-ID: <b3be92a01001271118m63b64256x2811ee740b9a4abc@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Cc: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, public-ietf-w3c <public-ietf-w3c@w3.org>, Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
2010/1/27 Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>:
> (cc www-tag with respect to "architecture for web applications"
> issue).
>
>
>> I'd like to check in on how to best coordinate with whatever
>> IETF efforts are going on in the space.
>
I might add there is the non-IETF but quite popular PortableContacts
(part of OpenSocial) that is quite close to vCard, and FOAF [2]. If
people want, I'm happy to devote W3C Social Web XG conference call
time/irc chat (16:00-18:00 UTC) for people to co-ordinate and discuss
this, as well as our list-serv [3]. We really need to make sure all
these efforts line up so people don't go crazy...

[1]http://code.google.com/apis/contacts/docs/poco/1.0/developers_guide.html
[2]http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/
[3]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/

>
> There have been a number of drafts, RFCs, and documents published
> around network access to calendars, address books.
>
> I'd think the best way to coordinate would be to first evaluate the
> compatibility of the new APIs with the existing network protocol
> standards both as written and †as deployed, and evaluate the
> compatibility issues. If there are strong reasons why W3C groups
> need an incompatible data model, representation, namespace, or
> method of interoperably accessing calendar or address information
> than that chosen by the IETF, then those incompatibilities would
> then drive the wider community review and venue.
>
> Working through some of the use cases (e.g., show how the
> JavaScript APIs could be implemented using icalendar or
> ldap directory access, and showing how icalendar and ldap
> use cases can be exposed via JavaScript APIs) would be
> a good first technical step.
>
> Larry
> --
> http://larry.masinter.net
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ietf-w3c-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ietf-w3c-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Roessler
> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 8:01 AM
> To: Mark Nottingham
> Cc: Thomas Roessler; Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux; public-ietf-w3c; Frederick Hirsch; Robin Berjon
> Subject: Coordination issue: vCard, iCalendar vs JavaScript contact and calendaring APIs
>
> The Device API and Policy Working Group is drafting APIs to manipulate contact and calendar data. †I'd like to check in on how to best coordinate with whatever IETF efforts are going on in the space.
>
> An FPWD for the contacts API has already been published:
> † http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-contacts-api-20100121/
>
> I'll follow up with a pointer to the Calendaring API draft when it becomes available.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Thomas Roessler, W3C †<tlr@w3.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 27 January 2010 19:18:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 January 2010 19:18:51 GMT