Timezone needed?

Bo Thorsen bo at klaralvdalens-datakonsult.se
Wed Jun 30 08:47:30 CEST 2004

On Wednesday 30 June 2004 08:38, Martin Konold wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 30. Juni 2004 08:12 schrieb Stephan Buys:
> Hi,
> > Agreed. UTC is the one safe bet that we have. And with the least
> > amount of "what-ifs". Daylight-saving, etc, etc is controlled through
> > the timezones which are client-driven.
> Sorry, but this will simply not work. There is a fundamental semantic
> difference between time with explicit timezone and local times without
> timezones.
> The only thing I am asking for (last mail from me towards the timezone
> topic) is make the timezone (UTC) _explicit_ (using a Z) not implizit.

This makes sense to me. I don't see any reason not to do this now, since 
it allows for future revisions of the format.

Let's just tag a Z at the end of datetime and move on. No change in 
functionality is required for now.



     Bo Thorsen                 |   Praestevejen 4
     Senior Software Engineer   |   5290 Marslev
     Klarälvdalens Datakonsult  |   Denmark
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.kolab.org/pipermail/format/attachments/20040630/2a6afad5/attachment.sig>

More information about the format mailing list