I apologize for being to telegraphic… As far as I understand CBOR and its goals, a slight simplified and slightly abstracted version migh be much more in keeping with the approaches of CBOR. From:
ws-calendar@lists.oasis-open.org <
ws-calendar@lists.oasis-open.org> On Behalf Of Considine, Toby Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 10:48 AM To: Michael Douglass <
mikeadouglass@gmail.com>;
ws-calendar@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [ws-calendar] WS-Calendar and JMAP That is my sense. I am wondering whether it is useful to address some of the potential recursion and similar issues we saw in some of the original work in the compressed JSON model that JMAP sees, and whether that will help extend M2M/H2H compatibility going forward… From:
ws-calendar@lists.oasis-open.org <
ws-calendar@lists.oasis-open.org > On Behalf Of Michael Douglass Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 10:45 AM To:
ws-calendar@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [ws-calendar] WS-Calendar and JMAP jmap is a protocol - it's actually developed by fastmail as a replacement for iMap and they're working through getting it re-specified as an rfc. In parallel we (calconnect) are starting work on jmap for calendars. Way back of course we started on a CalWS-REST which only got to a very basic level. JsCalendar on the other hand is a json format for icalendar which will allow us to move beyond the current restrictions of iCalendar. It would certainly make sense for us to look into re-expressing WS-Calendar as jmap along with definitions of the various WS-Calendar data items in jscalendar. On 4/16/19 20:08, Toby Considine wrote: Should we be looking at a WS-calendar serialized as JMAP as a new PIM-conformant spec? tc