Just a heads-up: I've linked a PR from the issue, to give people an idea of one way this might look. Cheers, > On 16 Jun 2022, at 11:54 am, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > I'd love to hear what people think about this issue: > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/2162 > > In a nutshell, the idea is to define a new structured type for dates, so that instead of e.g., > > SF-Date: 784072177 > > we'd have: > > SF-Date: @1994-11-06T08:49:37Z > > ...as the textual representation. Obviously, if we ever do binary structured fields, its representation there could be more efficient. > > Thoughts? -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2022 06:44:56 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:44:07 UTC