RE: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
Gosh! Hadn't expected this to be come such a "hot topic". I guess I was asking a contentious question based on what people were saying about the caldav standard on the list and my own research into DAV servers for small systems. I don't even pretend to be an expert in these protocols and areas, although I am someone who is willing and able to pick up technologies as required. I am thankful for these discussions which have explained the development strategy much more fully and especially Helge's informative post about the state of CalDAV. Kervin, I completely understand the issue of resources, the questions were really about target markets and what the list thought about them. It seems my particular market (home user, wanting to set up shared calendar systems on low resources - setting up large groupware systems not an option) will have to wait until either: a) a small (PHP) calendar product supports CalDAV b) other individual interfaces are written for otlkcon when the caldav interface is perfected and people have time and inclination for other things As a point of clarity, I never intended any criticism or FUD regarding CalDAV or its implementation, I was reporting my (in)experience given my requirements. I appologise for any concern caused. Very best regards, Matt P.S. I use a hotmail address for all public-facing web discussion as spam protection. Why hotmail? It was one of the first available in 1996 when I set up my account (before it was bought by Microsoft in 1998/9). I also use it via Outlook 2003, but didn't know it was WebDAV because it's all hidden away. -Original Message- From: Kervin L. Pierre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07 February 2006 20:57 To: Matt McNeill Cc: 'otlkcon-devel' Subject: Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces Hello, It's great hearing everyone's opinion on the proposed calendar access protocols. I think Helge is pretty much correct on the state of the technology. CalDAV will most likely be completed within months, maybe a lot sooner. We are already communicating with servers in test since the past few drafts with minimal changes between drafts. Also most commercial offerings are WebDAV based, and that seems to be the direction in which things will continue. Servers which do not support WebDAV will probably lose share to those who do, so I expect the more popular servers to include, at least WebDAV support in the future. Matt McNeill wrote: > If CalDAV is so far away from being an agreed standard, perhaps > several years away, shouldn't we be considering an interim interface > to the most popular 2 or 3 web-calendar applications? Just in order to > make this great I appreciate your point of view but my main issue with this statement is that you are not taking into consideration the resources needed to develop those interfaces. We could _consider_ interim interfaces, but then what? :) Someone will have to design/develop/test those interfaces. Probably several hundred man-hours per interface depending on the protocol's complexity. If we haven't been able to get 1 protocol out the door, would it be reasonable to consider 2 or 3 more? > I know and agree that from a standards poit of view what you are doing > in this development is the right thing, but from a user point of view > and a take-up point of view it might be worth considering an interim tack. > As mentioned earlier, considering a direction is the easy part. Actually getting something done is a whole different story. Which brings me to my point. That unfortunately, the whole argument is moot because we do not have the resources. > Keep up the great work, > Thanks for your support. We'll try. Best Regards, Kervin --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel
Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
Hello, It's great hearing everyone's opinion on the proposed calendar access protocols. I think Helge is pretty much correct on the state of the technology. CalDAV will most likely be completed within months, maybe a lot sooner. We are already communicating with servers in test since the past few drafts with minimal changes between drafts. Also most commercial offerings are WebDAV based, and that seems to be the direction in which things will continue. Servers which do not support WebDAV will probably lose share to those who do, so I expect the more popular servers to include, at least WebDAV support in the future. Matt McNeill wrote: If CalDAV is so far away from being an agreed standard, perhaps several years away, shouldn't we be considering an interim interface to the most popular 2 or 3 web-calendar applications? Just in order to make this great I appreciate your point of view but my main issue with this statement is that you are not taking into consideration the resources needed to develop those interfaces. We could _consider_ interim interfaces, but then what? :) Someone will have to design/develop/test those interfaces. Probably several hundred man-hours per interface depending on the protocol's complexity. If we haven't been able to get 1 protocol out the door, would it be reasonable to consider 2 or 3 more? I know and agree that from a standards poit of view what you are doing in this development is the right thing, but from a user point of view and a take-up point of view it might be worth considering an interim tack. As mentioned earlier, considering a direction is the easy part. Actually getting something done is a whole different story. Which brings me to my point. That unfortunately, the whole argument is moot because we do not have the resources. Keep up the great work, Thanks for your support. We'll try. Best Regards, Kervin --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel
Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
On Feb 7, 2006, at 20:40, Charles Wyble wrote: FUD, its seems more like CalDAV is close to a release, I would expect it in 2006. AFAIK all major issues are sorted out. But the CalDAV mailing list is the appropriate place to sort this out. I am curious why you call FUD? He is not saying it is so far away. He is saying IF it is. Big difference. What is FUD: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_Uncertainty_and_Doubt However, its not my goal to educate people what FUD is, so lets drop that topic right away ;-) Lets stick to the fact that CalDAV is rather complete and in final stages (certainly not "in the next days" but in the scope of "the next months") of specification and certainly not _several years_ away. And the standards process does move fairly slowly to be fair. CalDAV is in the 9th draft revision with several draft implementations in roughly 18 months. I find this rather fast given the complexity of the topic and the large number of involved parties. I wonder how you would select those 2 or 3 web-calendar applications? I think thats fairly simple and self explanatory. Simply look at activity and popularity. Not to hard to do. I honestly find it rather hard unless you refer to proprietary servers (which then would be Notes, Exchange and maybe Groupwise or Oracle). Thats why I asked. Honestly, how do you determine 'activity' and 'popularity', by reliable sources like Freshmeat? ;-) [we really don't need to discuss this further, I think there is little to gain] Thanks for all the caldav links and webdav links - but in reality most of them are experimental, incomplete, or early-adopter applications at the moment. This again raises the question which servers you have in mind as a backend for otlkcon. I believe any server that supports CalDAV. That what my hope is as well, but my answer was in response of the original poster who questioned that CalDAV servers / the protocol are appropriate. It really drove home to me the impression that these DAV protocols have yet to get major market acceptance as commodity protocols for web communications. How did you come to this conclusion? Actually almost all "serious" groupware servers base their open protocols around WebDAV. This even includes Exchange which has broad WebDAV support, or Oracle which is a reference implementation for CalDAV. He didn't say groupware servers did he? He said web communications. And to be fair the WebDav support in groupware servers is only recent. It isn't. Exchange has WebDAV support since Exchange 2000, which is, well 6 years old? I think we implemented WebDAV at around the same time, maybe a year or so later. The first protocol for eg Open-Xchange was also based on WebDAV and is also available for several years now (I think since about 2002 or so). To give just three examples. This is rather weird since you are posting from a Hotmail account. HotMail happens to use WebDAV for all Outlook communication ... Yes but how many people know that? How many people use Outlook to send/receive e-mail from hotmail. The whole point of hotmail is that its web based. And even then most people don't realize what protocol is being used. Ok. So now you know if that was your point ;-) My main point was that WebDAV is widely used for relevant tasks since years. Which is what is being done by the OpenConnector team. No one is diverting limited time/resources to develop interfaces for custom software. Great! I think the main issue here is that the poster didn't understand the problem fully and was trying to suggest a solution based on incomplete information. Thats reasonable, I just tried to outline that WebDAV and WebDAV based protocols are widely used for years, that is, putting the "incomplete information" straight. Maybe labeling the initial comment as FUD was incorrect, maybe not. If it was, all my apologies are given :-) Cal/Group DAV is a good thing. Which is why the OpenConnector team is building support for them into the software. The other standards are already well defined (IMAP/SMTP/LDAP) and servers exist. The Cal/Group DAV standards are getting there and have made good progress. This will only be accelerated by the OpenConnector project. I agree with all of that. best regards, Helge PS: I'm not an author of CalDAV, I just think that standards in OpenSource groupware are extremely important. -- http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/ OpenGroupware.org --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinf
Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
Helge Hess wrote: Hi, I must say I'm rather shocked by this mail. On Feb 7, 2006, at 11:27, Matt McNeill wrote: If CalDAV is so far away from being an agreed standard, perhaps several years away, FUD, its seems more like CalDAV is close to a release, I would expect it in 2006. AFAIK all major issues are sorted out. But the CalDAV mailing list is the appropriate place to sort this out. I am curious why you call FUD? He is not saying it is so far away. He is saying IF it is. Big difference. And the standards process does move fairly slowly to be fair. And still implementing _one_ documented draft is a much better working basis than implementing 3 self-invented protocols, _especially_ if those protocols happen to be HTTP based ones. This is true. shouldn't we be considering an interim interface to the most popular 2 or 3 web-calendar applications? I wonder how you would select those 2 or 3 web-calendar applications? I think thats fairly simple and self explanatory. Simply look at activity and popularity. Not to hard to do. Thanks for all the caldav links and webdav links - but in reality most of them are experimental, incomplete, or early-adopter applications at the moment. This again raises the question which servers you have in mind as a backend for otlkcon. I believe any server that supports CalDAV. It really drove home to me the impression that these DAV protocols have yet to get major market acceptance as commodity protocols for web communications. How did you come to this conclusion? Actually almost all "serious" groupware servers base their open protocols around WebDAV. This even includes Exchange which has broad WebDAV support, or Oracle which is a reference implementation for CalDAV. He didn't say groupware servers did he? He said web communications. And to be fair the WebDav support in groupware servers is only recent. It took some time for the standard to mature and become widely used. However its not really used outside of file management and groupware applications. Granted it doesn't have much use outside of those arenas anyway. I know IE has partially supported it for years, but how many major sites _really_ offer the protocol, I've never used it. This is rather weird since you are posting from a Hotmail account. HotMail happens to use WebDAV for all Outlook communication ... Yes but how many people know that? How many people use Outlook to send/receive e-mail from hotmail. The whole point of hotmail is that its web based. And even then most people don't realize what protocol is being used. Plenty. Hotmail uses WebDAV for Outlook communication, every Exchange 2000+ installation offers it, Apple iDisk uses WebDAV, Apple Finder has production WebDAV integration, Apache mod_dav is production quality and wide deployment since ages, all Linux desktops have great WebDAV support (Nautilus, GNOME), iCal, Kontact, Evolution all support ics sharing over WebDAV, GroupDAV/CalDAV servers are all based on WebDAV, etc etc etc I know and agree that from a standards poit of view what you are doing in this development is the right thing, but from a user point of view and a take-up point of view it might be worth considering an interim tack. This only holds true if the server the user wants to use doesn't support CalDAV. Which makes me wonder what those servers would be. Helge PS: of course I would also suggest doing the first implemention on the GroupDAV draft which is easier to implement for servers than CalDAV, but sufficiently similiar to 'upgrade' the support to CalDAV later on. Which is what is being done by the OpenConnector team. No one is diverting limited time/resources to develop interfaces for custom software. I think the main issue here is that the poster didn't understand the problem fully and was trying to suggest a solution based on incomplete information. Cal/Group DAV is a good thing. Which is why the OpenConnector team is building support for them into the software. The other standards are already well defined (IMAP/SMTP/LDAP) and servers exist. The Cal/Group DAV standards are getting there and have made good progress. This will only be accelerated by the OpenConnector project. Charles Wyble OSER Platform Lead Open Source Delivery Systems. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel
Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
Hi, I must say I'm rather shocked by this mail. On Feb 7, 2006, at 11:27, Matt McNeill wrote: If CalDAV is so far away from being an agreed standard, perhaps several years away, FUD, its seems more like CalDAV is close to a release, I would expect it in 2006. AFAIK all major issues are sorted out. But the CalDAV mailing list is the appropriate place to sort this out. And still implementing _one_ documented draft is a much better working basis than implementing 3 self-invented protocols, _especially_ if those protocols happen to be HTTP based ones. shouldn't we be considering an interim interface to the most popular 2 or 3 web-calendar applications? I wonder how you would select those 2 or 3 web-calendar applications? Thanks for all the caldav links and webdav links - but in reality most of them are experimental, incomplete, or early-adopter applications at the moment. This again raises the question which servers you have in mind as a backend for otlkcon. It really drove home to me the impression that these DAV protocols have yet to get major market acceptance as commodity protocols for web communications. How did you come to this conclusion? Actually almost all "serious" groupware servers base their open protocols around WebDAV. This even includes Exchange which has broad WebDAV support, or Oracle which is a reference implementation for CalDAV. I know IE has partially supported it for years, but how many major sites _really_ offer the protocol, I've never used it. This is rather weird since you are posting from a Hotmail account. HotMail happens to use WebDAV for all Outlook communication ... Plenty. Hotmail uses WebDAV for Outlook communication, every Exchange 2000+ installation offers it, Apple iDisk uses WebDAV, Apple Finder has production WebDAV integration, Apache mod_dav is production quality and wide deployment since ages, all Linux desktops have great WebDAV support (Nautilus, GNOME), iCal, Kontact, Evolution all support ics sharing over WebDAV, GroupDAV/CalDAV servers are all based on WebDAV, etc etc etc I know and agree that from a standards poit of view what you are doing in this development is the right thing, but from a user point of view and a take-up point of view it might be worth considering an interim tack. This only holds true if the server the user wants to use doesn't support CalDAV. Which makes me wonder what those servers would be. Helge PS: of course I would also suggest doing the first implemention on the GroupDAV draft which is easier to implement for servers than CalDAV, but sufficiently similiar to 'upgrade' the support to CalDAV later on. -- http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/ OpenGroupware.org --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel
RE: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
If CalDAV is so far away from being an agreed standard, perhaps several years away, shouldn't we be considering an interim interface to the most popular 2 or 3 web-calendar applications? Just in order to make this great piece of work useable and useful whilst the proper CalDAV standard settles down? Otherwise there is a chance that a boat could be missed. Thanks for all the caldav links and webdav links - but in reality most of them are experimental, incomplete, or early-adopter applications at the moment. It really drove home to me the impression that these DAV protocols have yet to get major market acceptance as commodity protocols for web communications. I know IE has partially supported it for years, but how many major sites _really_ offer the protocol, I've never used it. I know and agree that from a standards poit of view what you are doing in this development is the right thing, but from a user point of view and a take-up point of view it might be worth considering an interim tack. Keep up the great work, Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kervin L. Pierre Sent: 06 February 2006 15:32 To: Matt McNeill; otlkcon-devel Subject: Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces Hello Matt, Matt McNeill wrote: > being able to synchronise/view my personal diary in outlook, very much > what is being suggested by CalDAV interface. The only probem is, apart > from apache, there aren't many web servers which support webdav. I run > an embeded linux server and apache is too heavy. I've tried some PHP > webdav libraries but to no effect it all seems very immature and > undeveloped since it was introduced. > The best bet will be a CalDAV server. We have 3 open source servers that are being developed currently [ http://ietf.webdav.org/caldav/homepage/projects.html ] and more should follow along the way when the CalDAV specification is completed. > So I'm wondering whether, once this beta is running, you would > consider annother interface to a popular (7th most popular project on > SF) web calendaring application. This would bring a good user-base of > people who want to self-host their calendars... > I would like to say sure, but unfortunately limited resource will not allow this. The main trainport, CalDAV will still need a lot of work after the beta and probably a long will after that. Even had to scrapped plans for a native Kolab connector. We need more developers. WebCalendar does look like a very polished product though. I hope someone will write a simple, efficient, cross-platform CalDAV server eventually. Think once CalDAV settles down, it is going to be up to the calendar servers to support that protocol, and not the client's job to support individual server protocols. But it would be appreciated if people wrote custom backends for Open Connector for their favorite calendar applications. Best Regards, Kervin --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel
RE: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
I am running a small embeded linux server based on a hacked NSLU2 (costs about $60). These sorts of personal servers are becoming popular. Basically I have a small box (about the size of a dat tape) with a 80GB 2.5" HDD connected to it by USB2 which is connected onto my wireless router at home. It is silent and small. Specs are a 250Mhz ARM processor, 32Mb RAM On this box I run: - OpenSSH for remote access and IP tunnelling - Samba 3.x for sharing out files on the LAN - uPnP media server making available any MP3 / videos / pictures dropped into a given samba folder available to my Philips Streamium HiFi (via wireless LAN) - thttpd Webserver / MySQL / PHP5 (apache is available but it is heavy on this box) - IRC bouncer - dyndns update scipts etc Basically what I would like is a 'mini-exchange' for calendar data for the family, so for example my wife at home can see my calendar (and update it) and I can see her calendar (and update it) even when I am at work. We both use outlook 2003 to manage our personal mail (in PST files and IMAP) and I have an Exchange account at work. For more information about the NSLU2 see http://www.nslu2-linux.org My Home network can be seen: http://www.copperbeech.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/html/network.htm Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wyble Sent: 06 February 2006 16:30 To: Matt McNeill Cc: 'otlkcon-devel' Subject: Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces Matt McNeill wrote: > I know this project has been working incredibly hard to bring this > product to Beta, and although I am a lurker, I do follow progress very closely. As do a very wide variety of people I believe :) This > library could become critical to opening out the development > possibilities behind outlook and alowing the synchronisation of data > widely across many formats... This is true. Being open source certainly helps with integration into other projects/libraries. > > Imagine being able to see your Nokia phone as an outlook provider > rather than having to install the nokia sync software, for instance. > > However, not wanting to get ahead of the curve what I am interested in > is being able to synchronise/view my personal diary in outlook, very > much what is being suggested by CalDAV interface. What software are you using for your diary? Outlook lets you keep a Journal. Not sure if that does what you want. Does your diary support xml output? The only probem is, apart from > apache, there aren't many web servers which support webdav. I run an > embeded linux server and apache is too heavy. I've tried some PHP > webdav libraries but to no effect it all seems very immature and > undeveloped since it was introduced. What do you mean by an embedded linux server? Could you provide more details? > > So I'm wondering whether, once this beta is running, you would > consider annother interface to a popular (7th most popular project on > SF) web calendaring application. This would bring a good user-base of > people who want to self-host their calendars... > > https://sourceforge.net/projects/webcalendar > > Any thoughts? Well Webcalander would need to support caldav. Or more likely need to be coupled with a caldav server. Perhaps you could contact the cosmo people and ask about alternative web interfaces to cosmo. The current web interface is called Scooby I believe. Having an interface for every piece of software out there defeats the purpose of a standard :) Charles --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel
Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
Matt McNeill wrote: I know this project has been working incredibly hard to bring this product to Beta, and although I am a lurker, I do follow progress very closely. As do a very wide variety of people I believe :) This library could become critical to opening out the development possibilities behind outlook and alowing the synchronisation of data widely across many formats... This is true. Being open source certainly helps with integration into other projects/libraries. Imagine being able to see your Nokia phone as an outlook provider rather than having to install the nokia sync software, for instance. However, not wanting to get ahead of the curve what I am interested in is being able to synchronise/view my personal diary in outlook, very much what is being suggested by CalDAV interface. What software are you using for your diary? Outlook lets you keep a Journal. Not sure if that does what you want. Does your diary support xml output? The only probem is, apart from apache, there aren't many web servers which support webdav. I run an embeded linux server and apache is too heavy. I've tried some PHP webdav libraries but to no effect it all seems very immature and undeveloped since it was introduced. What do you mean by an embedded linux server? Could you provide more details? So I'm wondering whether, once this beta is running, you would consider annother interface to a popular (7th most popular project on SF) web calendaring application. This would bring a good user-base of people who want to self-host their calendars... https://sourceforge.net/projects/webcalendar Any thoughts? Well Webcalander would need to support caldav. Or more likely need to be coupled with a caldav server. Perhaps you could contact the cosmo people and ask about alternative web interfaces to cosmo. The current web interface is called Scooby I believe. Having an interface for every piece of software out there defeats the purpose of a standard :) Charles --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel
Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
Hello Matt, Matt McNeill wrote: being able to synchronise/view my personal diary in outlook, very much what is being suggested by CalDAV interface. The only probem is, apart from apache, there aren't many web servers which support webdav. I run an embeded linux server and apache is too heavy. I've tried some PHP webdav libraries but to no effect it all seems very immature and undeveloped since it was introduced. The best bet will be a CalDAV server. We have 3 open source servers that are being developed currently [ http://ietf.webdav.org/caldav/homepage/projects.html ] and more should follow along the way when the CalDAV specification is completed. So I'm wondering whether, once this beta is running, you would consider annother interface to a popular (7th most popular project on SF) web calendaring application. This would bring a good user-base of people who want to self-host their calendars... I would like to say sure, but unfortunately limited resource will not allow this. The main trainport, CalDAV will still need a lot of work after the beta and probably a long will after that. Even had to scrapped plans for a native Kolab connector. We need more developers. WebCalendar does look like a very polished product though. I hope someone will write a simple, efficient, cross-platform CalDAV server eventually. Think once CalDAV settles down, it is going to be up to the calendar servers to support that protocol, and not the client's job to support individual server protocols. But it would be appreciated if people wrote custom backends for Open Connector for their favorite calendar applications. Best Regards, Kervin --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel
Re: [otlkcon-devel] Interfaces
You can try cosmo: http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Projects/CosmoHome or adadav: http://akadav.sourceforge.net/ or anyone of these server products: http://www.webdav.org/projects/ Olafur Arason 2006/2/6, Matt McNeill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I know this project has been working incredibly hard to bring this product > to Beta, and although I am a lurker, I do follow progress very closely. This > library could become critical to opening out the development possibilities > behind outlook and alowing the synchronisation of data widely across many > formats... > > Imagine being able to see your Nokia phone as an outlook provider rather > than having to install the nokia sync software, for instance. > > However, not wanting to get ahead of the curve what I am interested in is > being able to synchronise/view my personal diary in outlook, very much what > is being suggested by CalDAV interface. The only probem is, apart from > apache, there aren't many web servers which support webdav. I run an embeded > linux server and apache is too heavy. I've tried some PHP webdav libraries > but to no effect it all seems very immature and undeveloped since it was > introduced. > > So I'm wondering whether, once this beta is running, you would consider > annother interface to a popular (7th most popular project on SF) web > calendaring application. This would bring a good user-base of people who > want to self-host their calendars... > > https://sourceforge.net/projects/webcalendar > > Any thoughts? > > Matt > > > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files > for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes > searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 > ___ > otlkcon-devel mailing list > otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel > --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid3432&bid#0486&dat1642 ___ otlkcon-devel mailing list otlkcon-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/otlkcon-devel
