SyncML: an introduction, its potential, its problems

Posted Apr 10, 2009 7:58 UTC (Fri) by fb (guest, #53265)
In reply to: SyncML: an introduction, its potential, its problems by pohly
Parent article: SyncML: an introduction, its potential, its problems

The fact that the standard decided to not support an important feature seems first and foremost a flaw in the standard to me.

Couldn't this just be solved by using XML datetime format for transferring the dates?

to post comments

SyncML: an introduction, its potential, its problems

Posted Apr 10, 2009 10:15 UTC (Fri) by Los__D (guest, #15263) [Link] (2 responses)

Couldn't this be solved in the (IMHO) proper way; always using UTC, letting clients do the conversion?

SyncML: an introduction, its potential, its problems

Posted Apr 11, 2009 2:54 UTC (Sat) by rganesan (guest, #1182) [Link] (1 responses)

> Couldn't this be solved in the (IMHO) proper way; always using UTC,
> letting clients do the conversion?

Not really. Suppose the client is in a timezone which has daylight savings in effect and set a recurring calendar item. What should happen when daylight savings is turned off in Winter? The user set the meeting at a specific hour local time not UTC. You can make the client automatically split the recurrent meeting into two both in UTC, but that causes other problems. Server has to be timezone aware to handle these kinds of cases.

SyncML: an introduction, its potential, its problems

Posted Apr 11, 2009 8:21 UTC (Sat) by Los__D (guest, #15263) [Link]

Ah, of course. DST coming along to screw things up again! :)