 | wernst says:First, let's be clear. I am a user that has problems with Google Calendar and RTM. Sometimes. It's frustrating. I have 3 smartlists that Google Calendar is set to monitor via iCal Events. Some weeks, all 3 work fine, with GCal getting updates within 3 or 4 hours. Some weeks, NONE OF THEM GET UPDATES. This week, two of my three feeds are getting updates and one is not.
I'm not entirely convinced this isn't RTM's "fault." I am also not entirely convinced this is Google's fault. I suspect Google suggested a range of ways to perform this task, RTM employed a method that is strictly speaking within Google's range, but in fact is close to one of the edges, and as a result, it works unreliably.
Here's my weird evidence.
There's another service out there called Airset (www.airset.com) and it is free, and tries to offer basic groupware. One of the things it has is a Calendar, and it can BOTH IMPORT AND EXPORT iCAL FEEDS.
So what I can do is tell Airset to grab my 3 RTM iCal feeds and display it in its calendar. THESE ARE THE SAME FEEDS CGal sometimes balks at, so clearly they are "technically correct."
Then I can tell Airset to export my three RTM iCal Feeds of its own. Airset then assigns three new iCal Feed URLs. Basically, Airset is just forwarding my RTM iCal feeds from RTM and making them available as a new, VASTLY SIMPLIFIED URL being hosted on a server that isn't RTM's.
And here's the kicker: CGal has NO PROBLEMS WHATSOEVER staying up to date with these feeds from Airset. They've been reliably updated within 3 hours every day. Every feed.
Since I have CGal monitoring 6 feeds, three of which should be identical to each other, I can see in real-time when Gcal is balking at RTMs' feeds and happily accepting Airsets'.
What's the difference? Well, there are two:
The first difference are the servers: the one Google sometimes balks at is run by the RTM team. The other is run by the Airset team. Maybe there's an RTM server problem that is subtle and irregular. That's totally a real possibility. I know. I run servers for web services as one of my professional tasks. But maybe it's not the problem. Only the RTM people can say for sure, but they should really REALLY be checking for it.
The second difference are the URLs. They are very different.
RTM's feed URLs look like this (a few letters are changed to make this an example):
webcal://www.rememberthemilk.com/icalendar/wernst/3094925/events/?tok=eJwNy0sKQjEMBdAVPUja5rec3CYFQRyo4PZ9kzM7raAF7PREdJJEcUsM2FQtl41234GwpjrZNtlFy2u2nUV9-fr9*nyv5*NmUqwYcjGHsyanHRYOk9MaZrGzpzS41rFTgtHpohvmByvvrQIzqj9meioF
Airset's look like this:
http://www.airset.com/services/iCal/private/mMFhVHXWPwDSvCUBnG1234JQhFXJbFoGAdjEDMLbVTwlGIzM/Personal.ics
I bet RTM's syntax is perfectly legal from a technical standpoint, but clearly, Airset's is cleaner URL is getting results where GCal is concerned. Maybe GCal isn't parsing the long URL correctly all the time. Maybe long URLs get lower update priorities. How should I know? How should the RTM team know? Beat's me, but this is something that should be EASY for the RTM team to check and test.
If I were a developer of RTM, I would start offering MUCH smaller URLs for the iCal Event feed. I would make sure they begin with http://. I would make sure they end with a real .ICS filename instead of a bunch of gibberish. And then I would ask my users if there is any improvement.
I would run a second server to host iCal feeds as a test. Just do it internally. Then set up dozens of regularly updated test feeds and see which ones and from where GCal is able to work with reliably and which ones it can't.
Come on, guys, I did all the legwork for you! All you need to do is set up some test accounts and test feeds, see if it works, and then report back to us.
I'm just one guy (true, I was a professional QA engineer for Toshiba, Symantec, and other major hardware and software companies in my earlier years) testing just half a dozen feeds, yet I'm seeing a pattern. Surely the RTM developers, working with lots of test feeds and being able to monitor their server logs, should be able to spot a similar pattern and track down its causes better than I can. All it takes is effort. And that sometimes seems like the problem.
If you sense exasperation on my part and on other user's parts, it's because it seems from our end that no effort is being spent by the RTM staff to REALLY INVESTIGATE THIS PROBLEM, other than to say "Hey it's Google's problem, and all our stuff is fine." I'm sure that's not the case, but that's how it sometimes looks.
GCal is the 900 pound gorilla in the web calendar market. RTM is the smaller, complimentary service that is trying to work with it. It seems to me that this means RTM needs to work harder to be compatible with the 900 pound gorilla than vice versa. To put it another way, if Internet Explorer were suddenly displaying RTM incorrectly, even if your HTML and Javascript were all technically correct, you wouldn't be telling users "Hey, our code is all correct, since it looks fine in Firefox. Please contact Microsoft and ask them to fix IE so RTM works with it." You would look into the problem, shake your head and mutter about Microsoft's stupidity, and then change your code so it works in IE.
It's the same thing with GCal.
Awaiting with baited breath for a response...
(and sorry for the long post. This rant/troubleshooting session has been on my todo list for a few weeks now)
-Warr Posted 3 years ago |