3 ms·
It is also a data model that amounts to a de facto standard across all real calendaring apps. The text serialization sure is ugly and who would want to touch it
by bigbones 2y ago
It is also a data model that amounts to a de facto standard across all real calendaring apps. The text serialization sure is ugly and who would want to touch it unless they had to, but that's just a parsing problem. The wiki page shows 14 component types, who is ever going to think of that many when designing a replacement schema? Why not just use the data model you already have 'for free'
- canucker2016 2y agoIt's a data model for an early-mid 1990s calendaring app (Lotus Organizer / Microsoft Schedule+). If that works for you, go for it.
- kreetx 2y agoBut what is the exact criticism here, e.g the serialized form doesn't look "nice" when you open the file?
- HelloNurse 2y agoA defacto standard for interchange ("feeds" announcing changes to activities), not for a database (remembering a large set of activities indefinitely). The appropriate schemas are vastly different: a message like iCalendar should be simple and self-contained (leaving cleverness to the applications exchanging it), while a database like the article discusses should be normalized (nontrivial structures and queries aren't a problem).