george at sudarkoff.com
Sun Apr 23 15:08:59 EDT 2006
Storing time in UTC and not storing anything else makes perfect sence (to
me) for two reasons. First, because UTC never changes. Second, because if we
want to be really smart about it, we should display the time in the time
zone of the _reader_.
But really, as it's all oh so badly messed up in our heads (if you have
relatives or friends you call often on the other side of the planet, you
know what I'm talking about), as far as the relative order of articles and
comments is preserved nothing else really matters all that much.
On 4/23/06, Piers Cawley <pdcawley at bofh.org.uk> wrote:
> "Syed Uzair Aqeel" <uzair at nairang.org> writes:
> > As a compromise, how about storing time in UTC and the offset in use
> > the entry was posted? Or, more acceptable, the timezone code, eg.
> > CST/EST/PDT.
> Time's a minefield and Timzone codes doubly so. It turns out they're
> not unique. One of Perl's wins is the work that Dave Rolsky did on
> the DateTime library (to the extent that every time I work with dates
> in Ruby I find myself wishing someone had ported DateTime). I'm all
> for stashing everything in GMT though.
> However, it's not something I'm going to lose any sleep over fixing;
> I'm happy enough with our delta based time reporting for comments and
> the likes. So long as articles are displayed in chronological order
> I'm pretty happy. Your mileage may vary of course, so patches are welcome.
> Piers Cawley <pdcawley at bofh.org.uk>
> Typo-list mailing list
> Typo-list at rubyforge.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Typo-list