🚀 go-pugleaf

Actually, there's a distinction beyond the importance of a meeting
that I think is important for more automated calendar agents to take
into account and that is rescheduability (pardon the hideous
neologism).  Some very important appointments are easy to reschedule
and I would be willing to move them to be able to attend another
meeting (e.g., a meeting with a member of my research group who's
around every day); others are perhaps not so important but fixed
(e.g., public lectures or seminars).  Depending on the amount of
notice, appointments might move from one category to another; e.g.,
given a few week's notice, I can change a doctor's appointment; given
only a few days, it's essentially fixed.

This particular feature of meetings is relatively common for people to
discuss when negotiating over a meeting time (e.g., "How about 3?"
"I'll have to see if I can move my other appointment and get back to
you." vs. "There's a seminar I wanted to attend" (i.e., if there's no
other time, then okay, but I'd sooner not)) but does not seem to be
either easy to make explicit (i.e., exactly which appointments are you
willing/able to reschedule?  How easy is it to move this meeting vs.
that meeting?) or often represented in computerized calendars.

However, it's also one that a computerized calendar system might offer
a significant advantage in handling.  In particular, rather than your
having to check with the other person, change your appointment and then
call back the original requestor, your calendar agent could do it all
for you (or as much as you wanted to let it) and simply present you
with a message saying, e.g., "The best time for the group meeting was
3; you were scheduled with Bob then, but he can make it at 4 instead;
shall I go ahead and change your schedule and confirm these two new
meetings?"

Kevin