Talk:CalDAV

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Time Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Can we expand on "using standard HTTP and DAV semantics to detect conflicting changes"? How does the system actually identify when a datum has been changed and needs to be synced? Does it use hashing like rsync, or deltas like VCS, or what?

--User:Mcandre

CalDAV is now RFC 4791.

See http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4791.txt --anon

How about a list of CalDAV clients and servers?

mulberry http://www.mulberrymail.com/
mozilla calendar
chandler
oracle (server/client)
apache slide (??)
evolution
apple ical (server/client)
darwin calendar server (by apple)
microsoft outlook using http://openconnector.org/

Even better would be a comparison (in a table format) of calendar software clients and servers according to major protocols (caldav, webdav, groupdav, exchange). --andrewz 9/4/2006

That would be best suited for another article like Comparison of calendar protocols or something similar. -Matt 17:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the original idea. I think it would be very useful to see a list of servers with their compliance levels, and a separate list of clients. Speaking of servers, don't forget DAViCal Adam Di Carlo 19:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like this would have the tendency to fall into the original research trap as most "comparison of" articles. Don't add content just because it would be useful, but keep in mind Wikipedia's policies. If the content cannot satisfy Wikipedia's policies, you are encouraged to post it on some other wiki (a Wikimedia project or otherwise). -- intgr [talk] 23:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added Bedework to the list of CalDAV servers and clients; it's an open-source early implementer of CalDAV (version 3.0 was released in April 2006 with much CalDAV support). Please note: I am a Bedework developer - but I'm not sure who else might add it. The listing seemed biased towards commercial software, and the inclusion of Bedework seems a valid way to rectify that. Arlen Johnson 00:14, 31 January 2009

Google Calendar

"Google Calendar supports CalDAV using iCal 3.x [8] and Mozilla Sunbird 0.8+[9]."

This is sort of misleading. Google Calendar supports any client that uses the CalDAV protocol which includes iPhones OS 3.0+ devices (iPhone + iPod Touch) for example.

-- nyenyec ☎ 00:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"While other calendar applications support CalDAV, Google Calendar only supports CalDAV using Apple iCal or Mozilla Sunbird." (http://support.google.com/calendar/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=99357) --24.87.152.127 (talk) 22:00, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge GroupDAV into this article

GroupDAV has been marked as little notable over a year ago, and, according to the official website itself, it isn't developed any further, as CalDAV seemed to pick up some of it's ideas and got standardized.

Mergeing GroupDAV into the History section of this article would be the best choice IMO, it gets rid of an insufficiently notable article, help contribute to this one, and avoids the effort that's been put into that one going to waste. HuGo_87 (talk) 03:58, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Not developed any further" is only one developer's opinion. The owner of the groupdav.org domain changed their strategy but there is still significant use of GroupDAV. It is not dead, not by far.

If there is to be a merge, it would be more appropriate to merge this article into WebDAV rather than CalDAV because GroupDAV does more than just calendars. Art Cancro (talk) 19:53, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why this needs to be merged. Yes, GroupDAV isn't going any further, but it is historically relevant and referred to from other material. As mentioned by Art it is not a subset of CalDAV, but covers other formats (e.g. CardDAV) too. You could make it a section on WebDAV, but this would obfuscate WebDAV with historic stuff. I'd rather keep it on its own page. Helge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helgemd (talk • contribs) 05:27, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge, since it does more than CalDav. TeraCard (talk) 03:39, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on CalDAV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160523203324/http://caldav.calconnect.org/implementations/clients.html to http://caldav.calconnect.org/implementations/clients.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:31, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]