- From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 19:08:03 -0800
- To: "'ejw@ics.uci.edu'" <ejw@ics.uci.edu>, "'Jim Davis'" <jdavis@parc.xerox.com>, "'WEBDAV WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, Alex Hopmann <alexhop@microsoft.com>
XML uses it and it is my understanding that all future IETF standards will be moving over to it. I believe Alex Hopmann knows more. Yaron > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Whitehead [SMTP:ejw@ics.uci.edu] > Sent: Friday, December 26, 1997 3:42 PM > To: 'Jim Davis'; 'WEBDAV WG' > Cc: Yaron Goland > Subject: RE: creationdate format > > Jim, > > The rationale for using the ISO8601 date format was a strong feeling on > the > Design Team (Yaron was the main proponent, as I recall) that it is a > superior time format. Unfortunately, I don't recall any further details, > though perhaps Yaron can shed some light on this. > > - Jim > > On Tuesday, December 16, 1997 1:17 PM, Jim Davis > [SMTP:jdavis@parc.xerox.com] wrote: > > Why does creationdate (13.1) mandate use of ISO8601 format instead of > RFC > > 1123 which is the prefered date/time format for HTTP 1.1, as stated in > RFC > > 2068, section 3.3.1 > > > > Also, can someone provide an example of an ISO 8601 format? The RFC > 1123 > > example from HTTP 1.1 is "Sun, 06 Nov 1994 08:49:37 GMT".
Received on Friday, 26 December 1997 22:08:23 UTC