On 3/11/14, 8:06 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: > Actually, there are perhaps some corners to consider knocking off > related to: >> * I verified that the syntax numbers with fractional parts is the >> same in both iCal in jCal. Specifically "4." is not valid in either >> grammar, so there is no need to discuss something like adding a 0 or >> remove the decimal point during conversion. > [...] > > So, in iCal, you could have '+4' . json doesn't allow the plus sign. > > iCal appears to allow leading 0s. json does not.
Maybe this just requires some adjustment in wording. The gist is that numbers should be represented in whatever way needed by the underlying rfc, i.e 5545 or 7159. If a number represented with a leading + sign is found in iCal, the same number can be represented without a leading + sign in JSON. Analogous for leading zeros. Would you prefer this is explicitly stated? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > jcardcal mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jcardcal
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
