- From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:23:07 -0600
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > On 17/01/2013, at 9:45 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: > Dates in HTTP are explicitly in UTC (we just call it "GMT"), so the timezone data isn't helping (and may be hurting). TZ should be in a separate header then. It helps the server to know what TZ a user is in. > Dates in HTTP have a granularity of one second; although people ask for finer granularity from time to time, giving them this capability is IMO asking for trouble (because clock sync and the speed of light / disk, combined with people's ignorance of distributed systems, leads to lots of bugs). Well, sub-second resolution can help if you're building, say, a timesync protocol. (Since every app protocol now has to run over HTTP... NTP is no longer good enough. j/k) > WRT years up to 9999 -- yes. The method I used consumes an extra byte after 2106... and then another in 4147. However, just one more byte buys up to 36812! Good!
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2013 23:23:31 UTC