<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Mar 19, 2015, at 12:12 PM, Gaurav Jain <<a href="mailto:monkeyfdude@gmail.com" class="">monkeyfdude@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">Its an experiment to find out if VEVENT can be used for VTODO.....</span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">Hi,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I’m all for experimentation, however I’m curious why you wouldn’t want to use VTODO for task items. I can’t personally enumerate all the reasons that VTODO exists as a distinct component type, but I feel confident in saying that there are reasons :)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Looks like <a href="https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2445.txt" class="">RFC 2445</a> contains the formal definitions of the VTODO and VEVENT component types, in section 4.6.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-dre</div></body></html>