- From: Roberto Polli <robipolli@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 11:34:22 +0200
- To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi Poul-Henning, Il giorno mar 23 ago 2022 alle ore 10:19 Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> ha scritto: > > Just tried to get some more feedback on twitter on the topic > > https://twitter.com/ioggstream/status/1561752931417952258 > > feel free to RT. > Making timestamps human readable is pointless, because, statistically > speaking, no humans ever read these headers in the raw. While statistically speaking humans do not read headers nor contents, not having a human readable format for dates will just lead people that cares for readability to: - either continue using HTTP-date; - or using a generic ISO8601 string, e.g. "2020-02-02T10:10:10+01:00". > The necessary handling of leap-second is complex and a layer-violation. Syslog does not use them https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5424.html#section-6.2.3 > And finally: it is much more expensive in terms of CPU power. This makes the more computationally intensive HTTP-date the only human readable option. In general, I am not sure whether CPU power issues should be addressed at a different level than field content (e.g. at messaging level) since it is not possible to predict the spillovers of those micro-optimizations: honestly I have no data on that. This is an interesting topic that needs further (and proper) investigation though. Thanks for your time and have a nice day, R.
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2022 09:34:45 UTC