Re: SKiCal spec.

On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, mtearle@tearle.com (Mark Tearle) wrote:


>> SkiCal is defined only in terms of pure (non-XML) RFC2445, but the
>> incorporation of its additional features into a superset of xCal 
>appears
>> to be straightforward.
>
>I haven't heard of any implementations as yet (and I suspect most of
the
>publicly available RFC2445 parsers/libraries would barf on the
>properties according to the last spec that I read; not for any bad
>reasons though - it's just they wouldn't recognise them as valid/legal)

Sosigenes would just ignore the extra properties, since it doesn't have
accessor methods for them.  They wouldn't give it any trouble otherwise.

>> Is there a mailing list for SkiCal discussions?
>>
>
>Yes, http://www.skical.org/eng/maillist_eng.html
>
>It's very quiet as far as I can tell.

It seems to be; I found it by Google a couple of days ago and
subscribed, and haven't seen any messages yet.

Gary McGath       http://www.mcgath.com/consulting/
callist@mcgath.com accepts ONLY mail sent to specified mailing lists. 
For other purposes, please send mail to gmcgath at the same domain.

Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2002 08:38:01 UTC