IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: A structured format for dates?

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 16 June 2022 06:08 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BAFCC14F74A for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 23:08:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.76
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.76 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=W07c5RmZ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=EQVh3r7F
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4_JKD75hRoxu for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 23:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F2B4C14F748 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 23:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1o1icx-0007IR-Kd for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 06:05:11 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 06:05:11 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1o1icx-0007IR-Kd@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1o1icv-0007H8-Lz for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 06:05:09 +0000
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1o1icu-00005A-2e for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 06:05:09 +0000
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EA935C0703; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 02:04:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 16 Jun 2022 02:04:57 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1655359497; x= 1655445897; bh=9DlJkzUuc6IPojHu2ubC0/M/kofZRF2/+mn9P/6gSq0=; b=W 07c5RmZFlIXHzpm8ZGa6hS0o4TE1FSqlUESQkgAVjY/1PfiSCebxOvaQhBpiFg8s 50k/U6E4Jval2OgG4x7L/8nJ4/ezT2E41H0rGyvK5Q8tA96jEvovVYLGgeBZaZYH dstFpAp3xm285XSezkbprHWdgoO++XXYXtEY22gY9I9gSXzS8brevUexGqGb8bLo 2VE3xU944xlCLFZsyWwGGsAoFTP3X/nmndWqd5P12BbbWr4OBisf+DlPjqTi1tIn Q5J3ZwIcIQnEO0jszeKIEYTCtfV4zwjhfNWsC1sfZ60dWoHWv1VHnlnISKdyeOha qAKqOkg7mAgm1Pvs5xPpA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1655359497; x= 1655445897; bh=9DlJkzUuc6IPojHu2ubC0/M/kofZRF2/+mn9P/6gSq0=; b=E QVh3r7FVsWknH3tNUXw5RHRH5P4DlR0/OLkuDsAaFVfXE6sAbBTx5TU59MboYNxE uPPsfYQbjPsdjylm0q3jhIL/1USPgDzNJsFTGSQ3r/xJ5NTJuc64PGxlLqRCK6RL 8E4r3GIabYAC1ymIBuH8iBnI8g3Il3PhxbH4uF+8Npvkq4FWTy9jy8AAdCRFcq21 u6FXsxud9f0aLbjrj7GeeX85CvMgrzYDaQxnPefjdI7lSFafa2XRP4IGaB1zPl0w czzCsO5ftOX7L7td/E5BGJ5i9sMiQqetzMcsChO8IP12aNDo/9Ex9He6FzBTa0KQ 0iaHeEHVnQ0OmM7iQW2Cg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:CMiqYjUpvsd9-uz9RDLYJOBdS8AWb1r9_PQbs1ieWY9r-RgjCC-RRw> <xme:CMiqYrlFzx8_AvgTMjgBUjgM8qv2yCwyS5CMV6g5TUuX_moxANpZvCcN6V_07jTaI 9a5SlL_NS1AWwX_TA>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:CMiqYvY90W9IYFBvcLWMFwia-UpGSHXlDl5gRiwKJRHE2hV9k9oHc-C4rHFp6LJ_gB6Zw_tMG-Bzvma-Hj4ekfiuD4uBASzq0lBnuDPgJ3ZsJ1XL-qyU3XmC>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedruddvvddguddtudcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurheptggguffhjgffvefgkfhfvffose htqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghrkhcupfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohht sehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepvdefhedvieegjeetiefhffdtgf eihfevtdevudetffehudfhfeelheeiudffkeeknecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdr tghomhdpmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpe hmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:CMiqYuXRbVEy0MfmrVAfJZyisdNNvDJq80ZYRh6RYx4aHvdQWM0q2w> <xmx:CMiqYtngtadScwUqW7BgldwN8zuTlRv-zWlnHZlupPSBFE2Qm8WbRg> <xmx:CMiqYrdOZse8TSkPDiBbOz9_EmmdKrzkKfM1JRokrl3IJzkrSKBkiw> <xmx:CciqYttU9WD3EISV8Nf7-qbkfNJTdbZhyyhVep81HYTb9HVeJJTwPQ>
Feedback-ID: ie6694242:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 02:04:55 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.100.31\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <202206160546.25G5k0KR056033@critter.freebsd.dk>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 16:04:52 +1000
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B34DEE15-DE14-4DC2-B6D0-F0CD1823EC30@mnot.net>
References: <8C9C4A5C-45DB-43C0-9769-2A7510854AB1@mnot.net> <202206160546.25G5k0KR056033@critter.freebsd.dk>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.100.31)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.111.4.29; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=out5-smtp.messagingengine.com
X-W3C-Hub-DKIM-Status: validation passed: (address=mnot@mnot.net domain=mnot.net), signature is good
X-W3C-Hub-DKIM-Status: validation passed: (address=mnot@mnot.net domain=messagingengine.com), signature is good
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1o1icu-00005A-2e c13c88bd4b1891158a8540ebe62f671d
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: A structured format for dates?
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/B34DEE15-DE14-4DC2-B6D0-F0CD1823EC30@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/40114
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Personally, I tend to agree with PHK - I think that Integer (or Decimal) is adquate and appropriate.

However, some people seem to keep on pushing back on this - I think especially for application-focused headers it's more visible. If we're going to do something, retrofit is a good opportunity for it, since we're defining SF-Date and friends.

Cheers,


> On 16 Jun 2022, at 3:46 pm, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> 
> --------
> Mark Nottingham writes:
> 
>> I'd love to hear what people think about this issue:
>>  https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/2162
> 
> I've added this comment:
> 
> 	I see no mention of fractional seconds ?
> 
> 	I think we need to ponder that, if the goal is (eventual) convergence for all timestamps in HTTP ?
> 
> 	Considering how much effort we spend on speeding up HTTP, I find the "human readable" argument utterly bogus.
> 
> 	Only a very tiny fraction of these timestamps are ever read by humans, and most are in a context where software trivially can render the number in 8601 format if so desired.
> 
> 	In terms of efficiency, I will concede that, in a HTTP context, it is almost always possible to perform the necessary calculations and comparisons on raw ISO-8601 timestamps, without resorting to the full calendrical conversions, but once all the necessary paranoia is included, I doubt it is an optimization.
> 
> 	My preference is sf-decimal seconds since epoch, (and this is largely why sf-decimal has three decimals in the first place), because it gives us fast processing, good compression and millisecond resolution.
> 
> 	PS: A Twitter poll with only 40 respondents, carried out on the first monday after new-years ? Really ?!
> 
> 
> -- 
> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email