Just a sample of the Echomail archive
Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.
|    ASIAN_LINK    |    Not the kind that loves you long time    |    8,456 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 6,427 of 8,456    |
|    Maurice Kinal to Ozz Nixon    |
|    Re TZUTC    |
|    12 Mar 19 20:44:42    |
      MSGID: 2:280/464.113 5c881a3a       REPLY: 1:275/362.0 5c88111e       Hey Ozz!               ON> See we can not say that, as the ISO standard also had "+" as        ON> optional, until it was revised in 2004.              References please. I've never seen any mention of the + as an option in any       official documentation of utc offsets and in fact have seen the opposite       including that UTC (+0000) is to include a + sign despite it not being behind       or ahead of UTC (ISO 8601). Another reference worthy of mention is       https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_UTC_time_offsets which is worth       comparing to the list in fts-4008.002. The only reference to 2004 I see as       far as ISO 8601 is concerned is as follows (and I quote);               The section dictating sign usage (section 3.4.2 in the 2004 edition        of the standard) states that a plus sign must be used for a        positive or zero value, and a minus sign for a negative value.        Contrary to this rule, RFC 3339, which is otherwise a profile of        ISO 8601, permits the use of "-00", with the same denotation as        "+00" but a differing connotation.              If you could please provide further evidence of an ISO, or RFC, prior to 2004       that states the + character is optional I'd appreciate it. However I doubt it       will change anything given the current state of well used modern dating       applications that insist on displaying the + character when and where it is       applicable. As for the above quote, and if my ageed memory serves me correct,       the "differing connotation" is a - character can be used in UTC when it is       converted from a different timezone other than UTC itself.               date --iso-8601=seconds = 2019-03-12T21:35:03+00:00        date --rfc-3339=seconds = 2019-03-12 21:36:50+00:00              From the above it looks to me that both standards are in sync wrt the display       of utc with a + character. Also worthy of note is the : character to delimit       hours from minutes in the offset. To make that work it has to use the %:z       specifier, or even %::z to include seconds, as shown below;               date +%:z = +00:00        date +%::z = +00:00:00              Put *THAT* in your corrupted fts-4008.002 standard and rotate! :::evil grin:::              Life is good,       Maurice              ... Don't cry for me I have vi.       --- GNU bash, version 5.0.2(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)        * Origin: Little Mikey's EuroPoint - Ladysmith BC, Canada (2:280/464.113)       SEEN-BY: 15/2 18/200 57/0 123/1970 153/250 226/17 229/107 426 452       SEEN-BY: 229/1014 240/5832 249/206 317 400 267/800 280/464 317/2 3       SEEN-BY: 322/757 342/200 393/68 633/0 267 280 281 408 412 640/1384       SEEN-BY: 712/620 848 886 770/0 1 10 100 330 340 772/0 1 210 500       PATH: 280/464 770/1 712/848 633/280 229/426           |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca