On 05/06/18 08:50, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
That naming doesn't make much sense to me, and I actually found the RULE_START and RULE_END naming pretty clear and self-explanatory.
Except that it's not the rule itself, but the transitions within the rule ... I'd still like to know why there is a need for the 'end' anyway as the next transition already contains that.
And I've still not had anybody explain why the removal of seconds from the offsets is seen as a good idea?
It may interest some people that tzdist-bis list is discussing some of the edge cases on the rules currently while they put TZIF into a formal RFC standard. These standards are not ideal but do provide a common set of rules such as names of fields ...
-- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
