On 3/20/14, 3:39 PM, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
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?
Yes. And I don't think it needs much text. Just let the implementer know
the issue is there to take care of.
_______________________________________________
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
