[cosmo-dev@ CC:ed, Reply-To: set to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

So, I've been looking through the Chandler domain model to see what remains to be done w.r.t. EIM for Preview. Here's the laundry list of stuff that's related to ContentItem/Note and Stamps: I'll send out a separate email for the rest of the domain model (mainly, collections), since those are more dump-and-reload than sharing (morsecode) specific.

Feel free to chip in with stuff you think I've missed or misunderstood, or to answer/ask questions.

I added some little codes to track what I thought the Cosmo impact of the changes would be:

  [√] == would need parallel change from Cosmo
[X] == no change needed from Cosmo (but needed for dump/reload porpoises)
  [?] == unsure if this requires changes (i.e. part of morsecode)

- Morgen sent out an earlier email about triage in ItemRecord

- Unsupported fields in ItemRecord:

  [X] error (a string)
  [?] read
  [?] needsReply
[√] lastModification: An enumeration to say whether the last change was
                    queued, edited, sent, updated. I should probably
                    add the 5th state, created, too.
modifiedFlags: This is a "bitfield" of the values in lastModification.


- In the ItemRecord code
    # TODO: see why many items don't have createdOn
    [X] I'll look at this

- ItemRecord (importing triage):
    [X] # TODO: do something with auto

- In the NoteRecord code: there are TODOs in the import & export methods:
    ...
    [?] # TODO: REMOVE HACK: (Cosmo sends None for empty bodies)

    I'm not sure what this is about ...

- NoteRecord currently has:
    # Note.reminders?  (Translator not implemented yet)
reminderTime = eim.field(eim.DecimalType(digits=20, decimal_places=0))

[√] My understanding here is that Bug 7915 (and iCalendar interoperability) imply that we should have a separate ReminderRecord (or, AlarmRecord, if we're going with iCalendar-like syntax). What do people think of that?

- EventRecord:
[√] icalParameters and icalProperties should probably move to NoteRecord, since VTODOs (and VJOURNAL, if anyone ever supports that :) can have
    them.

- EventRecord:
[√] # TODO: EventRecord fields need work, for example: rfc3339 date strings

- EventRecord:
    (when exporting event modifications)
    [?] # TODO: yield a TaskModificationRecord if appropriate

- EventRecord needs support for autoTriage when that's checked in
    [?]
(possibly this has been taken care of in the Chandler triage_recurrence
  branch).

- {Event,Task}ModificationRecord:
   [√] Do we need to think about supporting a 'modifies' field à la
       iCalendar RANGE (IIRC)? It's possible Chandler will support
       THISANDFUTURE more robustly (Currently, we just make a new
       recurring series in this case, which is probably what Cosmo
       does, too). Maybe this could just be a future addition to the
       schema?

- MailMessageRecord:
[?] I believe there are more fields needed besides subject/to/cc/ bcc; I'm not sure if we need the complete rfc2822Message LOB (at least for dump/reload). Probably this is more Mr Kirsch's area, but I can take a look if need be. Also, Brian, were you working on the non- MailStamp
       parts of dump/reload (e.g. account info, mainly)?


_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev

Reply via email to