Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!brunix!iris.brown.edu!muru From: muru@iris.brown.edu Newsgroups: comp.groupware Subject: Re: Group Calendar Sharing Message-ID: <46147@brunix.UUCP> Date: 29 Jul 90 21:27:24 GMT Sender: news@brunix.UUCP Reply-To: muru@iris.brown.edu () Organization: IRIS - Brown University Lines: 81 I am a newcomer to the interesting calendar/scheduling discussion that I believe has been going on for some time. Among the important conclusions from the discussion are: a) Scheduling meetings differ considerably depending on the office environment. b) An "agent" may be used to negotiate mutually agreeable meeting times. c) Scheduling systems are more likely to be accepted widely if participants can maintain their individual calendar on a portable computer and "dock" them frequently (possibly once or twice a day) so that it is available online. d) The issue of "Is it beneficial for one to look behind another's calendar" still remains an issue. a) The prominent scenarios for an office scheduling are: 1) Each participant has equal access to anyone's calendar (can R/W on any calendar). 2) Same as 1 except that s/he can R anyone's calendar but only W his or her calendar. 3) A select group of participants (typically managers) having R access to all calendar's but (in)directly having W access to all (or most) calendars. Situations for this scenario was pointed out by Scott McGregor mcgregor@hemlock.Atherton.COM - Article 236. Technically, scenario 2) seems to be the most appropriate for which scheduling systems should be aimed at. b) An agent to negotiate a meeting transaction. Craig Fields <1990Jul25.045719.21115@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> has implemented(?) an application that uses a mail server (agent) that negotiates with the participants. I believe this feature would be very useful if the the participants get to see the counter-proposal by a participant who cannot attend a (tentatively) scheduled meeting. Of course, if the scheduling user decided that the participant(s) who cannot make it to the tentatively scheduled meeting are not crucial, s/he may confirm the meeting with the other participants. c) Portability of calendar Susan Ehlrich [TOOIS, Oct 87] and Grudin [CSCW 88] describe situations in which scheduling systems may be successful when scenarios require or is beneficial to maintain uptodate online calendars. I agree with Scott and Alan that portability is a prime concern to the success of online calendars/scheduling systems. I would like to know scenarios in which online scheduling is compelling, thereby making participants maintain uptodate online calendars. d) "Is it beneficial for one to look behind another's calendar" In article 233, Time Shea claims that it is "not very" important for one to see inside others' calendars. I argue that it may be important in resolving many meeting conflicts. The following discussion is based on a priority-based, graphical scheduling system (called Visual Scheduler or VS) that I had worked on in school three years back. A paper on this system is scheduled to appear in CSCW '90 proceedings. VS allows a participant to assign a priority to each event which is depicted by a different shading. Also, a participant can leave a short description of the event which then appears on the graphical display of the calendar. The scheduling is darker for high-priority events and lighter for low-priority events. A scheduling user quickly locates mutually acceptable time slots by stacking the participants' calendars together and looking for an open slot. If none is found, the least disruptive time is the one that admits the most light. In case of conflicts (as often is the case), a scheduling user can look behind the stacked calendar transparencies to see a list of the participants blocking a time slot. S/he can make a spontaneous decision to schedule a meeting depending on whether a participant is crucial to a meeting or whether s/he thinks a participant can be asked to reschedule a prior event. Also, a participant can leave a short description of the event which then appears on the graphical display of the calendar. I would appreciate if someone could post a summary of the important conclusions drawn from previous discussions on this topic that I have missed. muru palaniappan