RFC 3283: Guide to Internet Calendaring
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document describes the various Internet calendaring and scheduling standards and works in progress, and the relationships between them. Its intent is to provide a context for these documents, assist in their understanding, and potentially aid in the design of standards-based calendaring and scheduling systems. The standards addressed are RFC 2445 (iCalendar), RFC 2446 (iTIP), and RFC 2447 (iMIP). The work in progress addressed is "Calendar Access Protocol" (CAP). This document also describes issues and problems that are not solved by these protocols, and that could be targets for future work. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC3283
- Published
- July 2002
- Authors
- B. Mahoney; G. Babics; A. Taler
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- app
- Pages
- 16
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5545Internet Calendaring and Scheduling Core Object Specification (iCalendar)Updated
September 2009
- RFC 6047iCalendar Message-Based Interoperability Protocol (iMIP)Current
December 2010
- RFC 6638Scheduling Extensions to CalDAVUpdated
June 2012
- RFC 2447iCalendar Message-Based Interoperability Protocol (iMIP)Obsoleted
November 1998
- RFC 2446iCalendar Transport-Independent Interoperability Protocol (iTIP) Scheduling Events, BusyTime, To-dos and Journal EntriesObsoleted
November 1998
- RFC 4791Calendaring Extensions to WebDAV (CalDAV)Updated
March 2007
- RFC 5333IANA Registration of Enumservices for Internet CalendaringUpdated
October 2009
- RFC 7529Non-Gregorian Recurrence Rules in the Internet Calendaring and Scheduling Core Object Specification (iCalendar)Current
May 2015
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?