Re: [111attendees] Agenda pains

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 30/07/2021 à 12:10, Vittorio Bertola a écrit :
> 
> 
>> Il 29/07/2021 20:45 Alexandre Petrescu 
>> <[e-mail]> ha scritto:
>> 
>> 
>> Le 29/07/2021 à 16:12, Jonathan Morton a écrit : [...]
>>> For those cases where timezone differences result in a change of 
>>> date, ambiguity could be eliminated by quoting it as (+1d) 
>>> instead of just (+1), or by directly quoting the actual 
>>> day-of-week in brackets.
>> 
>> I agree with the need of disambiguation; simply '+1' might mean 
>> +1hour.
>> 
>> +1d is possible, and there could be others.
> 
> "(+1)" is standard notation in the airline industry, which is 
> possibly the most common source of a scheduled activity starting on
> a day and ending on the following one, at least for people who travel
> a lot. I wouldn't expect IETF participants to find it ambiguous.

True: the airline industry often displays such +1 in timetables.  I
remember from a long past having seen +1 displayed on a seat LCD, and on
the boarding pass, during a long range passenger flight.  In French they
say (j+1) rather than (+1).

There is also the wristwatch industry using an names of timezones
inherited from airport names: 'LAX' rather than 'Pacific' or 'PDT', and
similar.

Were we to rely on air industry we'd rather use these instead of UTC.

Alex

>