IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: A structured format for dates?

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 04 August 2022 02:26 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 8E71DC157B45 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 19:26:30 -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=0.248, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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=gPHZHWLo; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=i2y6oLF4
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 o-w_cerhCgtA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 19:26:26 -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 50FC6C14F736 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 19:26:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1oJQYq-000qVW-2v for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2022 02:26:08 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2022 02:26:08 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1oJQYq-000qVW-2v@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1oJQYq-000qUW-Ar for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2022 02:26:07 +0000
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1oJQYn-00AhWG-QO for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2022 02:26:06 +0000
Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 546255C0116 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 22:25:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 03 Aug 2022 22:25:55 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=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=fm1; t=1659579955; x= 1659666355; bh=NQW9Acfoqce17wNAw/t6cQ1GfoA+vH3HRNomSfjaew4=; b=g PHZHWLoejhOn9J/DG6eUKnM/TkPOlWBE+pPoaj/sWXKWAXbdr8xWdofJ90/CIZbf hmzLHyDqpizbI/+5loId/opD9hgSjHuEIu1K4OmLJod6z8tn/NB9SSAZVStAOLL0 +nAijahGBrsWDzFm2dMPfbhGGI7JEFhAXuVNOpgxnogKsyFrC5TdFEL+/OKXM4P1 aRV7UcHPGvd/dSE27V+VqXsSlcaF+BzLYEq30Robbdv3j8MKlZpxo6VW/qmcleKN Mpg9sywwddw5gDiiwunOLRaLj3uRTmSOCYCsqkbMjBBZZZ6AJJKPaLSREV4mkYD+ 31F3g0Q/6TLOzOKZKEZrQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=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=fm3; t=1659579955; x=1659666355; bh=N QW9Acfoqce17wNAw/t6cQ1GfoA+vH3HRNomSfjaew4=; b=i2y6oLF4Hd7s5UF9a xyKWr5YzOwEIML9AlPTJQ47gJ3QtCtB3pzk4HDpFO9uRdMmyz4A7h9bpxgg+ldCT yEEB/xK+ImsZYcP0B/9A/EeFm/yINT8VICD7idEOjALsUqKI2WsplIVtkic9t7Xd e6ZGy6alIsvmbLlbUki3yQ95OrIJg54/QbFoA31KPNG78uK78y1Lf1DpEK+rcu9D 7+FpR8HwgyIOY7ehjBPdLXMZxLXOAVDXPAe4phWlese+y1LgORHYm1za2A0tjoF7 ctMvhV90miYOiL5l0Itl0zwC7ZlOnMt8HUrMCQtqk+VVMM24Ilbw0TmBtdN/v4Qj iEwQg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:My7rYuRIe0IX3GR1aKopw-AZvF2u1WYlY3L3H4bpnLmWBG4EdBZ23Q> <xme:My7rYjz9IESFmBglHk-WN8oUApQJZRZiTdbHUQLXT2y_5XEcjsGApPbyFZVMYt6rj pKi28PKXoPcW2IXpQ>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:My7rYr0SQBihnSrP822f8oIVSwiLtX2TJ-Q4KVbmaYmIVjNbzXZ6Ou0sfD1UFivYOq_nmF6Ba-TXxkcjbMmGJWMkmRSOBZ2f5COOSZOFP-_OcHEx6nRiDu4F>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrvddvkedgieduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefhtgfgggfuffhfvfgjkffosehtqh hmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghrkhcupfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehm nhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepveelvefhieevgfdugffgteffteffhe etveehudehtdeflefgjeefhfeugeeufedvnecuffhomhgrihhnpehhthhtphifghdrohhr ghdpghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhmnhhothdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpe dtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvght
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:My7rYqA0PVW_oap9rSWJ4nwyAhzfqn1uQTi30gkVFzL3tH3ZZgsgZw> <xmx:My7rYnjsGshsu7hS97B09tU8I4oH91zl81niKAh7gkm_L1F8kBMhnA> <xmx:My7rYmobcfNkzhVYDzf8EQmHHvYfSFe-uHWhdIfQmY4EpmBsL3qmFg> <xmx:My7rYpcb-ZIJ_RuJqw4AE90STg9Rg88kPJOQKdbunrBosTtRJE7PYw>
Feedback-ID: ie6694242:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 22:25:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\))
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2022 12:25:51 +1000
References: <8C9C4A5C-45DB-43C0-9769-2A7510854AB1@mnot.net> <5CE5343D-EECB-4F25-A3DB-F300E7708656@mnot.net>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In-Reply-To: <5CE5343D-EECB-4F25-A3DB-F300E7708656@mnot.net>
Message-Id: <A94FB409-7D37-4B5E-894C-33E8CC4986D4@mnot.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.111.4.27; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=out3-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, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1oJQYn-00AhWG-QO a8975d3c369dc21b9f3067111c8ecbc1
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: A structured format for dates?
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/A94FB409-7D37-4B5E-894C-33E8CC4986D4@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/40301
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>

Based on discussion at 114, I've updated the PR. See:
  https://httpwg.org/http-extensions/mnot/2162/draft-ietf-httpbis-retrofit.html#name-the-date-structured-type

Thoughts? 

Also, I see that Martin is wondering whether this should be a separate document. Any opinions there? It's very short...

Cheers,



> On 21 Jun 2022, at 4:44 pm, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> 
> Just a heads-up:
> 
> I've linked a PR from the issue, to give people an idea of one way this might look.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
>> On 16 Jun 2022, at 11:54 am, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>> 
>> I'd love to hear what people think about this issue:
>> https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/2162
>> 
>> In a nutshell, the idea is to define a new structured type for dates, so that instead of e.g.,
>> 
>> SF-Date: 784072177
>> 
>> we'd have:
>> 
>> SF-Date: @1994-11-06T08:49:37Z 
>> 
>> ...as the textual representation. Obviously, if we ever do binary structured fields, its representation there could be more efficient.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email