--===============1334548430==
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
  boundary="nextPart2031079.yoJJdBGRYX";
  protocol="application/pgp-signature";
  micalg=pgp-sha1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

--nextPart2031079.yoJJdBGRYX
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On Wednesday 22 December 2004 23:32, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
> Currently KMail has a (nasty) workaround for sending invitations in the
> body of the mail to make Outlook detect that the mail is an invitation.
>
> In bug report 93824 an example of an Outlook-generated invitation is give=
n,
> where the invitation also is a multipart message (albeit it's
> multipart/alternative, not multipart/mixed like kmail's message) and
> contains a human-readable description of the event.
> I'm attaching both that outlook-generated and a kmail-generated invitatio=
n.
> As one can see, the only relevant differences seem to be:
>
> Outlook-generated:
> -) Content-Type: multipart/alternative
> -) includes Content-class: urn:content-classes:appointment
>
> KMail-generated:
> -) Content-type: multipart/mixed
> -) Uses Content-Disposition (i.e. the ics is marked as attachment)
>
> Would it be possible to make KMail generate invitations similar to the
> Outlook-generated one? We could then get rid of the dirty hack of inserti=
ng
> the ics into the body.
>
> I'm not sure whether the Content-Type or the Content-class or the
> Content-Disposition is the key to make Outlook recognize the invitation...

I had been wondering the same thing and apparently the requirement stems fr=
om=20
the times of interoperability with Exchange 5.5. Bo told me that he=20
discovered it was necessary for the old kroupware, and so he figured it wou=
ld=20
still be necessary today. Note that there are two different cases:

1) new invitation:
  those are generated as either top level (inline) iTip or mime mails in=20
  Kontact, depending on a config switch, OL in current versions (>=3D2000 I=
=20
  believe) generates mime invitations. We fear (but I personally would real=
ly=20
  like someone to confirm that) that older OL only understands inline

2) replies and updates to invitations
  Kontact always generates those inline, not as mime mails, I asked Bo once
  and he said he believed it the right way to do things. I think OL also=20
  produces top-level, inline iTip messages for these. Again, confirmation of
  that would be nice to have.

Then there is the additional issue of signed and/or encrypted invitations a=
nd=20
answers which I would like to sort out eventually. From the little testing=
=20
we've done, I don't think OL copes with either, at this point. Feel free to=
=20
correct me on this. Kontact can currently handle signed and encrypted=20
invitations, but not updates coming from KOrganizer, I don't think.

Just thought I'd throw in what I know, I've always felt uneasy about this k=
ind=20
of doing things based on suspicions and myths passed on among team=20
members. :)

Till

--nextPart2031079.yoJJdBGRYX
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBBypeWtrsWGirveVsRArLlAJ9pfqmAQJuP3tPC2HmbxW/+eOxDIwCgr1Hl
RNQLG9f68C7lfNur/RZB0ow=
=5Is4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart2031079.yoJJdBGRYX--

--===============1334548430==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
kde-pim mailing list
kde-pim@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
kde-pim home page at http://pim.kde.org/
--===============1334548430==--