Bug#1991 & X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE

[Adam Tauno Williams]

In working on Bug#1991
<http://bugzilla.opengroupware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1991> I
noticed that in LSGetICalForAppointmentsCommand (appointment::get-ical)
the X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE and PRIORITY attributes in the iCalendar
output both get there values from "date_x.importance".   So the values
will always be the same (0...9) except that a value of 0 results in
the X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE attribute not being appended to the
output.  Is this OK?  Does X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE and PRIORITY use
the same scale of values or does some back-and-forth translation need to
happen?  I googled a bit and couldn't find any documentation
for X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE?.

--
OpenGroupware.org Developer
developer@...
http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/developer

[Helge Hess]

On 05.07.2008, at 21:22, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

> In working on Bug#1991
> <http://bugzilla.opengroupware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1991> I
> noticed that in LSGetICalForAppointmentsCommand (appointment::get-
> ical)
> the X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE and PRIORITY attributes in the  
> iCalendar
> output both get there values from "date_x.importance".   So the values
> will always be the same (0...9) except that a value of 0 results in
> the X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE attribute not being appended to the
> output.  Is this OK?  Does X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE and PRIORITY use
> the same scale of values or does some back-and-forth translation  
> need to
> happen?  I googled a bit and couldn't find any documentation
> for X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE?.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms530502(EXCHG.10).aspx

The scale of PR_IMPORTANCE is different:
   /* PR_IMPORTANCE values */
   #define IMPORTANCE_LOW ((long) 0)
   #define IMPORTANCE_NORMAL ((long) 1)
   #define IMPORTANCE_HIGH ((long) 2)

Greets,
   Helge
--
Helge Hess
http://helgehess.eu/
--
OpenGroupware.org Developer
developer@...
http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/developer