> -----Original Message----- > From: Dawson Frank (NMP/Irving) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 2:30 PM > To: 'ext Hollenbeck, Scott' > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Last Call: Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps to > Proposed Standard > > > "One size fits all"? This isn't about haberdashery.
Obviously. Sorry if the point of the analogy wasn't clear. > The point of a standard format is exactly that there needs to be a > single precise format. If you are going to use an Internet date/time > standard, then it ought to be same or at least an isomer (ie, iCalendar > date/time format). > > Especially, when it comes to basic data types like date/time. Yes, we should have a standard, but that standard should be usable across the IETF. In the provreg WG, we're using XML Schema to specify a protocol because XML and XML Schema provide needed extensibility features. I can't use 2445-compliant date-time format because XML Schema won't accept it. We can debate the merits (or detriments) of using non-IETF specified technologies for IETF work, but that's not the issue at hand. The Timestamps draft describes formats that can be used where 2445-format can't, and at least in the case of the provreg WG that flexibility is needed. -Scott-
