[CalendarServer-users] how to create a new calendar from a client app

[Max Bobzien]

Ok, got your point and thanks for the explanation. :)

Max


Am 11.08.2009 um 18:47 schrieb Stroller:

>
> On 11 Aug 2009, at 10:02, maxbobzien at mac.com wrote:
>
>> This is maybe a stupid question, but why would you do that?
>
> Uh, lots of reasons.
>
>> For my understanding, you set up the server in a specific  
>> environment, for example your office.
>
> From my understanding, adding additional calendars is a basic part  
> of calendaring functionality. Surely all calendaring servers should  
> have this.
>
>> And every employee has it's own office calendar, where all his  
>> entries are stored. So why would you want an additional calendar?
>
> Typically, each user might wish to have a "work" and "home" calendar.
>
> A consultant who works out of two hospitals might wish to have  
> separate calendars for each one, so that the appointments show in  
> different colours in iCal client. Thus he would have a total of 3  
> calendars, including home. That would also allow him to delegate  
> work calendars separately to a different administrator at each  
> hospital - the admin staff would subscribe to all three of his  
> calendars, but appointments allocated to the "home" calendar or the  
> calendar of the other hospital would show simply as "busy" with no  
> details shown; the admin assistant at each hospital would only see  
> full appointment details (patient name, ward number, notes, other  
> attendees &c) for events in the calendar pertaining only to their  
> own hospital.
>
> The consultant might decide to host a medical convention, and thus  
> wish to create a separate calendar for that - in this case there are  
> a bunch of reasons it should be separate from his private calendars.  
> For a start, he might be organising events for this convention that  
> he might not have time to attend himself - he may have an  
> appointment with sales reps for a pharmaceutical company whilst  
> another doctor is speaking in hall 2 - and thus having the  
> convention's schedule all mixed up with his private one would only  
> cause confusion. Furthermore, he will want to export the calendar or  
> host it so that attendees can see the details of each convention  
> event, but not his own private schedule. Anyone should be able to  
> subscribe to this calendar, but no-one else should be able to add  
> events (whereas his assistant should be able to add events to his  
> main work calendar(s) and his wife should be able to add to his home  
> calendar).
>
> This is not a bunch of contrived examples. The receptionist may wish  
> to create a new calendar for the meeting room or for another shared  
> resource - one should be able to subscribe to its calendar & see  
> when the meeting room is free without having to phone the  
> receptionist to find out (most of the time managers will wish to  
> hide this calendar in iCal client by unticking the box next to its  
> name, but it is always available to them instantly). Busy  
> receptionists, like everyone else, are glad of tasks they can  
> delegate & automate.
>
> If we make calendars a resource which must be "deployed" by IT, we  
> inhibit their flexibility. If we give users the power to create &  
> control, then they'll find their own ways to use them to get their  
> jobs done better. This encourages users to actively use calendaring,  
> creates a stronger organisational culture surrounding it and there  
> are fewer "i didn't put that in my calendar because... " excuses.
>
> I'm actually just a n00b on this mailing list - I've been subscribed  
> a long time, but I haven't yet deployed iCal server. I basically  
> just want it to synchronise my own diary between my desktop & my  
> laptop, and maybe to allow a secretarial service to add appointments  
> in the future. So I hope other list members will forgive & correct  
> errors or omissions. However, this kind of use I've described seems  
> "obvious" to me.
>
> I was nicotine deprived when I originally posted and read your "why  
> would you do that?" as a criticism of the previous poster; reviewing  
> it, I now interpret your post as a genuine request for clarity  
> ("this is may be a stupid question" is phrasing that I would use  
> myself if I really didn't understand something). Apologies if my  
> first two paragraphs seem blunt.
>
> Stroller.
>