Re: contacts / calendaring coordination

Is the Sept 2 call adequate?

Cheers,


On 18/08/2010, at 3:23 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> In Maastricht we had talked about having a coordination call on this
> topic. I'm just posting to say that I'm still interested such a call so
> that we can start a better conversation among all the relevant parties.
> 
> On 8/4/10 7:18 AM, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>> hi Mark,
>> 
>> I had forgotten to copy you on these.  Probably worth keeping the
>> IETF liaison to OMA in the loop on the contacts piece.
>> 
>> Active work on these coordination items is, at this point, in Cyrus'
>> and my hands.
>> 
>> Cheers, -- Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>  (@roessler)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> Date: 28 July 2010 12:21:33
>>> GMT+02:00 To: W3C Device APIs and Policy WG
>>> <public-device-apis@w3.org> Cc: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, Cyrus
>>> Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name> Subject: Calendaring coordination
>>> 
>>> I talked to some folks about calendaring in the hallways.  The IETF
>>> calsify WG isn't currently active; most of the work has moved to
>>> the CalConnect consortium: http://www.calconnect.org/
>>> 
>>> Cyrus and I agreed to work toward a conversation between Calconnect
>>> and this WG about the lunisolar calendaring requirement.  I'll
>>> follow up on that when I'm back form the IETF meeting.
>>> 
>>> (ACTION-228)
>>> 
>>> Regards, -- Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>  (@roessler)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> Date: 28 July 2010 12:15:37
>>> GMT+02:00 To: W3C Device APIs and Policy WG
>>> <public-device-apis@w3.org> Cc: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, Harry
>>> Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> Subject: Next steps with vcard / POCO /
>>> OMA
>>> 
>>> The IETF's vcard4 spec is through Working Group Last Call and going
>>> to be in IETF Last Call soon; that will be the last opportunity for
>>> us to review and comment on that work.  Perhaps unsurprisingly,
>>> that WG is recommending that we use vcard4 as the underlying
>>> format, not PoCo.  There is no current communication between that
>>> group and PoCo.
>>> 
>>> I seem to have an action item to organize a joint conference call
>>> with the vcard4 folks some time soon; we should also try to invite
>>> Joseph Smarr and the OMA folks to that.
>>> 
>>> Regards, -- Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>  (@roessler)
>>> 


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/

Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2010 01:27:28 UTC