Poul-Henning Kamp scripsit: > Windows have got it right now I belive, but it used to be that a > file created and transmitted from Denmark at the end of the business > day would be older than a file created at the start of business day > in California, despite a strict ordering of the events.
It's still true in the sense that the hardware clock is assumed to run in LCT on Windows, and therefore discovering UTC depends on a correctly set TZ variable. It's false in the sense that Windows now supports TZ correctly. > Sure, and you can timestamp then on either timescale, because there > is a 1 to 1 translation between the two timescales . I think it's confusing to call it "1 to 1", except in the sense that LCT seconds are the same length as UTC/TAI seconds. There are many LCT timestamps that correspond to more than one UTC timestamp. This can be kludged around by adding a bit (the isdst field in a struct time) to say whether a LCT timestamp is the first or the second instance. > The scheme you propose is eminently workable, and more or less exactly > what we advocate. I'm happy that you now see the merits of it. Nope, he still doesn't. -- On the Semantic Web, it's too hard to prove John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] you're not a dog. --Bill de hOra http://www.ccil.org/~cowan