W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 1999

RE: Brown draft feedback on time stamping and on criticality flags

From: Phillip M Hallam-Baker <pbaker@verisign.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 13:34:29 -0400
To: <david.solo@citicorp.com>
Cc: <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001701bedab1$c73a35e0$6e07a8c0@pbaker-pc.verisign.com>
> I think you and Tom (et al.) are indicating that there is a place for a
> different attribute which describes other properties of the signature. 
> I think defining such an attribute is fine, although outside of the core
> syntax.

Well that would not be my first choice...

But I do think that it is intellectually defensible to insist that all
times be in GMT (something the server needs to know if time is going
to have any relevance) and that the local time zone information be
stated as an offset.

IE if the contract is signed in Cambridge MA the time splodge has
format:  <XYZ time="Fri, 30 Jul 1999 09:07:44" local="-500">
If it is signed in Mountain View it has the format
<XYZ time="Fri, 30 Jul 1999 09:07:44" local="-800">

And of course "local" would be optional since GMT is the only proper
time to use anyway. [cue music: Elgar vgariations, Nimrod, flags of
all nations (but mostly British) are unfurlled]


Seriously, I find nothing quite so disorienting as Web surfing when
every random site feels the need to tell you the time of day in the
wrong context.

What I want is to be able to buy shares on the London market, sell
them on the NYSE and be given the transaction times of both in local
time for my private island in the Caribean where I have parked the yatch.

But at some later time I may need to know the precise local time
the trade went through because I need to reconcile the trade with
some paper documentation I got sent relating to the trade.

		Phill
Received on Friday, 30 July 1999 13:33:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:07 GMT