Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes: > Using UTC offset for future time stamps is IMHO possibly much more > problematic for the same reason of possible changes in future.
Yes. But it is also an advantage when the purpose is creating timestamp independent of possible changes in future. >> Complex time zones in timestamps will not rely on user's computer having >> the up-to-date time zone database: [1916-09-12 12:00+01 @Europe/London] >> unambiguously specifies the UTC offset yet emphasizing that the >> timestamp is related to specific location (Europe/London, but not >> Europe/Paris). In fact, one may somewhat abuse this format and specify >> [1916-09-12 12:00+01 @France/Marseille] emphasizing the location. > > Then if they are not to relay on time zone database, on what they can > rely as alternative? I suggest ignoring @... if +01 is specified (unless "@!..." is provided). Then, the timestamp is considered in a nautical time zone with fixed (+01) offset from UTC. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>