Re: IETF must use only UTC in its announcements (Was: Live Streaming of the IETF 88 Technical Plenary

ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com Wed, 30 October 2013 14:16 UTC

Return-Path: <ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 758C911E8171 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 07:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mr+NGxbZAI+m for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 07:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [66.59.230.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DA7811E8222 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 07:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01P06PWQXSDC007OS8@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 07:11:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="utf-8"
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01P067WB5KG0004X76@mauve.mrochek.com> (original mail from NED@mauve.mrochek.com) for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 07:11:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com
Message-id: <01P06PWP9XG4004X76@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 07:08:03 -0700
Subject: Re: IETF must use only UTC in its announcements (Was: Live Streaming of the IETF 88 Technical Plenary
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:36:12 +0100" <20131030083611.GA27804@nic.fr>
References: <87879E7D-A55B-4A88-80B8-B503C89E52CB@iab.org> <20131030081355.GA23990@nic.fr> <7F135C08-A550-450F-82B4-1F239E115BC3@tzi.org> <20131030083611.GA27804@nic.fr>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, IETF Discuss <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:16:48 -0000

> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:25:59AM +0100,
>  Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote
>  a message of 16 lines which said:

> > I don’t know about “only UTC" for events that are also visited
> > locally, but giving the UTC time as well would be a good idea.

> My experience with international organizations is that, when you
> indicate the time in two zones, there is often a discrepancy. With
> only one zone, there is no doubt about the real value.

And my experience is that regardless of what sort of organization you're
dealing with, if you ask them to convert a time for a future event that is
being held in a particular physical location to some other time zone, they
won't apply time zone rules correctly and the only announced time will be
wrong.

Which argues for including the local time when the event will take place. If
you want to mandate that the time also appear in UTC, great, but it's quite
important that the local time also be there.

				Ned