Subject: Re: [VCARDDAV] VCARDDAV Digest, Vol 12, Issue 61

From: Jean-Luc Schellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:39:20 +0200

>   1. Re:  VCARDDAV Digest, Vol 12, Issue 59 (Cyrus Daboo)
>
> Why not use CLASS:PRIVATE on the temporary group vCard. We should  
> probably
> make a better stipulation in the spec as to what is expected with  
> each type
> of CLASS (e.g. clients MUST NOT "export" PRIVATE vCards). CLASS in
> iCalendar is very poorly specified in terms of what should really  
> happen.
> It would be good to be more specific about the different CLASS  
> values in
> vCard 4.0 if we can.

I totally agree (but it's not a solution for the kind/group's issue ;o)!
As I previously said for me CLASS stands for PRIVACY (I suggested to  
change the property name) and I propose e.g. PRIVACY: EXPORTYES or  
EXPORTNOT.
By the way, export the vCard of another person is a privacy issue if  
you want to respect the privacy laws here in Europe!
Regards,
Jean-Luc

_______________________________________________
VCARDDAV mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav

---

From: Dan Mosedale <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:25:45 -0700

Jean-Luc Schellens wrote:
>> It would be good to be more specific about the different CLASS values in
>> vCard 4.0 if we can.
>
It seems to me that the way the word "export" is typically used w.r.t. 
addressbook user agents is different from the way it's being used here, 
and it strikes me as likely to cause confusion.  If I want to take my 
contacts from one user-agent (say Thunderbird) and move them to another 
user-agent, I almost certainly want to take my private contacts with 
me.  This also seems very much covered by the way people use the word 
"export" today.  Perhaps the verb "share" would be a better description 
of what's being discussed here?

Dan

---

From: Simon Perreault <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:02:03 -0400

On Thursday 21 August 2008 16:25:45 Dan Mosedale wrote:
> Perhaps the verb "share" would be a better description

+1

Precise language is always good.

-- 
Please try Numb, a STUN/TURN server implementation.
Free access at http://numb.viagenie.ca/.
_______________________________________________
VCARDDAV mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav

---

From: "Javier Godoy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:09:00 -0300

Dan Mosedale wrote:

> addressbook user agents is different from the way it's being used here, and 
> it strikes me as likely to cause confusion.  If I want to take my contacts 
> from one user-agent (say Thunderbird) and move them to another user-agent, I 
> almost certainly want to take my private contacts with me.  This also seems 
> very much covered by the way people use the word "export" today.  Perhaps 
> the verb "share" would be a better description of what's being discussed 
> here?

+1

IMHO, the meaning of the CLASS values is:

PRIVATE == MUST NOT be shared (they are only readable by its creator). MAY be 
exported if explictly authorized and requested by the creator.
CONFIDENTIAL == may be shared with allowed users/systems (e.g. CardDAV + RFC 
3744). The exact confidentiality level is out of scope for the vCard 
specification.
PUBLIC == may be shared with anyone (*).

I think this definitions (or similar definitions with the same intent) are 
general enough. Emphasis should be added in that further restrictions may be 
imposed by the system where the vCards are stored.

(*) There is an scenario which I'm not sure if it is CONFIDENTIAL or PUBLIC: a 
vCard instance may be only readable by authenticated users, (excluding "guest" 
users). This scenario specifies a broad audience for the vCard instance, 
despite of denying read privileges to some agents (e.g: mail harvesters which 
would be unauthenticated).

Best Regards

Javier