dougrday/icalvalid — Issue #4: RFC 2245/5545 validation differences
Author: dougrday
Created: 2011-10-11 15:08:01+00:00
State: open

(from Jon Udell)

I was just looking at this example I'm including in an article:

http://icalvalid.cloudapp.net/?id=634538537864262694

And I asked myself why, when I made the example, did I feel it was necessary to add UID:123. So I checked RFC5545:

3.6.1. Event Component

Component Name: VEVENT

Purpose: Provide a grouping of component properties that describe an
event.

Format Definition: A "VEVENT" calendar component is defined by the
following notation:

eventc = "BEGIN" ":" "VEVENT" CRLF
eventprop *alarmc
"END" ":" "VEVENT" CRLF

eventprop = *(
;
; The following are REQUIRED,
; but MUST NOT occur more than once.
;
dtstamp / uid /

To verify that the validator checks that I removed UID:123 from the snippet and rechecked. It was valid! So I looked at the rule it's applying:

That comes from RFC2445 which, evidently (and somewhat puzzlingly) seems to have required nothing!

[Doug]
I believe the validator should hone to RFC 5545, rather than the older (and perhaps less accurate) RFC 2245. Therefore, I'd like to change the validator to ensure these fields are required.