- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 04:22:46 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: public-webapi@w3.org
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > > * Ian Hickson wrote: > >I propose we define DOMTimeStamp in ECMAScript as being a Number giving > >the number of milliseconds, excluding those in leap seconds, since > >1970-01-01T00:00:00.0Z. > > While the current text isn't particularily clear, my reading is that > implementations should determine some "epoch" time and set the time- > Stamp relative to it for all events. This may but need not be the time > you suggest, the system start time is given as another example. > > I think this is sensible since the implementation does not necessarily > have access to the current time or might not want to make it available > to applications due to security concerns. When applications do have > access to this information, they can easily derive it from a timeStamp > by comparing two of them with a given time. Well I don't really mind what esoteric implementations might do, but, as discussed on today's telecon, for Web browsers we want interoperability. > Is there a specific reason why you think this should be relative to this > specific time? Time stamps should be of comparable magnitude with comparable deltas across different Web browsers, IMHO. Every difference between browsers introduces a new possibility for a Web page bug. Web authors manage to find plenty of ways to shoot themselves in the foot already, there's no reason for us to give them even more ways. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 28 March 2006 04:22:53 UTC