The more I think about it the more I think there is a business case for time
zone without time given the observation that the expressed hour difference
between two points on the earth at a given instant can be as much as 23
How do we compare a story that on 30 June 1946 two atomic bombs were
detonated on Bikini Atol at 21:35 and 22:00 hours GMT on the 20th. Time is
UTC/GMT +12 hours.
A report published on Kili Island or in recollections of the Bikini people
would put 31 June as the date.
Shall the resolution of dates readable to day be limited to +- 1 day?
(there is actually a historical basis of this in, for example, the Jewish
calendar which distinguishes between inside and outside of Jerusalem)
OR shall we demand that all dates without zone be implicitly expressed as if
spoken in Greenwich?
(Again there is a historical basis for this kind of logic. In the Jewish
calendar, for instance, some events such as new moon are always expressed as-
if spoken in Jerusalem)
Or shall we assume (as most of us probably currently do) that all dates
expressed without time zone are expressed at the same arbitrary place?
A user, for example, from Ushuaia connecting to a server in Upsala asking
for news stories about Egypt 12 Feb 2011 would be handled the same as if
searching the LOC for books published on 21 June 1942...
22:00:34 30. Juni 1946 (GMT)
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 19:31:45 -0400, Ray Denenberg wrote
> From: Edward C. Zimmermann
> > I tend to feel that we should not profile things out.. only discourage
> > their use.
> Depending on how exactly we handle that, I might or might not agree. If we
> can leave it out of the BNF and out of the feature description, but put in
> some sort of blanket statement that certain feature are not necessarily in
> violation but are discouraged, and a receiver is not obligated to recognize
> them, I could go along with that.
> > To time zone.. it can be viewed as something relevant to hour.. and
> > thus illogical as applied to objects of coarser readability.. but it
> > can also be viewed as a specification of geographical locale of the
> > speaker.. and as such not without meaningful use..
> I really think that's a stretch. If you want to indicate geographical
> locale, I would think you would use some legitimate geographic vocabulary
> rather than indicate a time zone.
Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB