Please use Ctrl-L [reply-to-list] rather than Reply-All when replying to list messages.
On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 15:50 +1000, Andrew McMillan wrote: > On Sat, 2011-01-22 at 14:23 -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: > > This really seems like a server-side issue to me. The issue really is > > there is no way standard way to specify a hierarchy of tasks in either > > UI or in the representation [VTODO] so I think that would be a > > special/custom plugin. > I was under the impression that VTODO did support parent/child/sibling > relationships. > Like: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5545.html#section-18.104.22.168 It supports relationships, but no specific impact (side-effects) of relationships. <QUOTE> Changes to a calendar component referenced by this property can have an implicit impact on the related calendar component. For example, if a group event changes its start or end date or time, then the related, dependent events will need to have their start and end dates changed in a corresponding way. Similarly, if a PARENT calendar component is cancelled or deleted, then there is an implied impact to the related CHILD calendar components. This property is intended only to provide information on the relationship of calendar components. It is up to the target calendar system to maintain any property implications of this relationship. </QUOTE> The real-world up-shot of that is that no one will do anything with the attribute described. It would be fantastically useful - the server I work on supports task hierarchies, but to make use of them you need to write 'native' code and your own UI, for VTODO's you are best of just hiding that aspect of the data model (and I've never seen a client that supported it in any capacity). You'll also run into consistency issues when using GroupDAV/CalDAV/CardDAV and the server tries to be 'helpful' or smart. For example if on a CalDAV server I have a todo list of many tasks and three of those tasks are linked in some way - the client makes a modification to one of those tasks which has a side-effect on the status of the two other tasks.... the client will remain merrily oblivious to that fact that the other objects in the collection have changed. This is just a crappy part of the specs, there isn't any widely supported mechanism for the server to notify the client that certain references in its cache have been invalidated. The only way the client figures that out is if it polls the collection; which can be slow and/or computationally expensive. Polling the entire collection after every update would just be brutal - but it is the only way to remain consistent. So your proposed feature of the completion of child tasks bumping the percent complete of the parent task would be frustrating for the user because the user would not see the percentage of completion of the parent task change. And what if they then open the parent task and manually set the percentage complete? You now have a conflicting update. Beyond that there is the issue that if the parent task has four children, and three are complete - so the percent complete is 75% - and the user adds a fifth child task does the percent complete now decrease to 60%? What if each of the child tasks is not a proportional section of the parent task? Do you let the user specify each sub-total of work? There certainly is no standard attribute for that so you are down to using an X- attribute that risks getting discarded by badly behaving servers and clients. And of course that would require a customized UI to be of any value to the user. _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers