home bbs files messages ]

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