Ovid wrote:
> Whoa! I missed a memo and now I'm confused. I did think that a lot of
> this fuss over the date YAML meta information in TAP was going on a
> bit, but small details can be important. However, date YAML diagnostic
> information (we need formal names to distinguish between those two)
> should be up to the app, yes? What if scientific software needs
> picoseconds? We shouldn't be putting those arbitrary constraints here.
> A defined format for meta information is important. It is bad for
> diagnostic information.
We're not prohibiting other formats, just establishing a baseline. It's
mostly to avoid the mess of...
02-03-1997 Is it Feburary 3rd, 1997 or March 2nd, 1997?
01-02-03 Jan 2nd, 2003 or Feb 1st, 2003 or maybe Feb 3rd, 2001!
3:02 3:02 am or pm? In what time zone?
Thu Sep 6 21:32:19 PDT 2007 Oh great, I'm supposed to parse this?
The TAP datetime proposal is a *recommended* format. It says...
"TAP recommends that TAP output should follow the following standard for dates
and times."
"should" and "recommend" are as RFC 2119.
3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
Which is to say, most people will just follow the TAP datetime standard when
outputting dates. If you really need to use another datetime format, go ahead.
--
The interface should be as clean as newly fallen snow and its behavior
as explicit as Japanese eel porn.
