On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 14:34, Dave Peterson wrote: > > If that means you've stored one integer that is a multiple of 60 between > -50400 and 50400, rather than storing one integer between -840 and 840, > then we're quite close--I don't see that it matters much. But a > dayTimeDuration value is not an integer, it's a pair of integers. Is > that really what you want to store? Who's talking about storage? We're not specifying an implementation, or even a design for an implementation. We're writing a specification. What someone stores is not our concern, and there is no benefit to the spec in attempting to 'optimize' storage by treating timezone information as an integer instead of as a duration. You mention a bug found earlier in the idea that timezone information is a duration; at the risk of replowing well known ground, can you remind the rest of us of what it was? Michael
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2005 20:28:12 UTC