Re: Last Call: Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps to ProposedStandard

2001-11-10 Thread pregen
John, where is the original of this note?  Did it go to the calendar list? If it's on another list, can you point me to it so I (and the list) can see the text of the whole note.  Thanks. "John Stracke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/09/01 18:10                 To:      

Re: Last Call: Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps to ProposedStandard

2001-11-09 Thread Doug Royer
Joe Abley wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 05:16:09PM -0500, Keith Moore wrote: > > However, many events are actually specified relative to a particular > > timezone, and timezone offsets occasionally change with little advance > > warning. As such, this representation may not be sufficient f

Re: Last Call: Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps to ProposedStandard

2001-11-09 Thread Doug Royer
Why not just specify that dates/times are RFC2445 compliant? The calsch WG spent a long time debating these issues. In addition the date-time format used in RFC2445 is also ISO-8601 based. In addition the calsch WG has a plan (don't laugh too hard) for the usage of time zones. This draft only m

Re: Last Call: Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps to ProposedStandard

2001-11-09 Thread John Stracke
Keith Moore wrote: >However, many events are actually specified relative to a particular >timezone, and timezone offsets occasionally change with little advance >warning. As such, this representation may not be sufficient for >specifying dates and times of some kinds of events, particularly >f