{"slug":"event-response","name":"Event Response","summary":"Tell an organiser whether an invitee expects to attend.","category":"Calendar","status":"Reuse assessment","version":null,"origin":"MailSchema binding proposal","profile":"Existing calendar standards under review","overview":"An invitation asks the recipient to respond for a specified event. This record examines how agents can use existing calendar protocols and whether a MAP binding would add useful behaviour.","target":"The event identifier, occurrence where applicable, and invitation update sequence.","operations":[{"name":"Accept","description":"Indicate that the invitee expects to attend."},{"name":"Decline","description":"Indicate that the invitee does not expect to attend."},{"name":"Respond tentatively","description":"Record a tentative attendance response."}],"inputs":"The invitation reference and response for the appropriate event or occurrence.","results":"An attendance response recorded for the identified invitation, with updates and cancellations handled by the applicable calendar protocol.","permissions":"The agent needs permission to respond for the invitee. Receiving an invitation alone does not grant that permission.","humanRoute":"The ordinary invitation response in a calendar or service interface.","example":{"title":"Respond to a workshop invitation","steps":["An invitation identifies a workshop and its scheduled time.","The recipient asks their agent to respond tentatively.","The agent uses the supported calendar route and records the response."],"exception":"If the invitation has changed, the client must reconcile the update before replying. It must avoid sending the same response through two different routes."},"references":[{"title":"iCalendar · RFC 5545","href":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5545","description":"The calendar object model."},{"title":"iTIP · RFC 5546","href":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5546","description":"Scheduling exchanges and invitation responses."},{"title":"iMIP · RFC 6047","href":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6047","description":"Calendar exchanges carried by email."},{"title":"Schema.org RsvpAction","href":"https://schema.org/RsvpAction","description":"Related vocabulary for attendance responses."}],"openQuestions":["Whether a MAP binding adds a capability beyond existing calendar protocols.","Updates, recurrence and duplicate response handling.","Any new execution profile; iMIP is not the current MAP HTTPS profile."],"history":[{"label":"Reuse assessment","description":"Existing calendar protocols are the starting point. A MAP binding has not been defined."}],"contributors":[{"name":"MailSchema"}],"maintainers":[{"name":"MailSchema"}]}