Daniel Rall wrote:
Interesting -- what package does that date formatting code belong to
now? If it's homeless, I wouldn't mind adding it to Jakarta Commons
Lang. Use of a third-party JAR is reasonable for HEAD (2.0), which has
more dependencies, but not ideal for 1.2 (or any 1.x release), whic
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
Daniel L. Rall wrote:
Jochen, I defer to John on the timezone interpretation of what's
generally accepted as output by common server implementations.
However, like usual, I'm of the opinion that servers should be
gracious about the types of input accepted, so long as doin
Daniel L. Rall wrote:
Jochen, I defer to John on the timezone interpretation of what's
generally accepted as output by common server implementations. However,
like usual, I'm of the opinion that servers should be gracious about the
types of input accepted, so long as doing so isn't explicitly a
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Do, 2004-06-17 at 10:46, John Wilson wrote:
The strengths of XML-RPC are its simplicity and interoperability with a
very wide range of other implementations. The creator of the spec and
the person who claims ownership of the XMl-RPC trademark has repeatedly
and vocifer
On Do, 2004-06-17 at 10:46, John Wilson wrote:
> The strengths of XML-RPC are its simplicity and interoperability with a
> very wide range of other implementations. The creator of the spec and
> the person who claims ownership of the XMl-RPC trademark has repeatedly
> and vociferously stated th
On 17 Jun 2004, at 09:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Do, 2004-06-17 at 10:24, John Wilson wrote:
The example in the spec does not include milliseconds - the generally
accepted interpretation of the spec (i.e. by XML-RPC implementers) is
that they are not permitted.
If so, that leaves still more roo
On Do, 2004-06-17 at 10:24, John Wilson wrote:
> The example in the spec does not include milliseconds - the generally
> accepted interpretation of the spec (i.e. by XML-RPC implementers) is
> that they are not permitted.
If so, that leaves still more room for vendor extensions ... :-)
On 17 Jun 2004, at 09:20, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Do, 2004-06-17 at 09:36, John Wilson wrote:
The XML-RPC spec (http://www.xml-rpc.com/spec see the last but one
bullet point) says that timezones may not be present in a date. The
generally accepted interpretation of the spec is that only the preci
On Do, 2004-06-17 at 09:36, John Wilson wrote:
> The XML-RPC spec (http://www.xml-rpc.com/spec see the last but one
> bullet point) says that timezones may not be present in a date. The
> generally accepted interpretation of the spec is that only the precise
> subset of ISO 8601 date/times give
On 17 Jun 2004, at 08:02, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
Hi,
the DateFormat used in the DateTool is supporting only a subset of ISO
8601 date/times. In particular time zones are missing, likewise one
must
not use milliseconds.
The XML-RPC spec (http://www.xml-rpc.com/spec see the last but one
bullet poi
Hi,
the DateFormat used in the DateTool is supporting only a subset of ISO
8601 date/times. In particular time zones are missing, likewise one must
not use milliseconds.
I suggest using the class XsDateTimeFormat from ws-jaxme instead, which
is a thread safe instance of Format. The only differen
11 matches
Mail list logo
