Re: [netmod] IETF WG state changed for draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis

On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 8:31 AM Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> wrote:

>
> Hi Juergen,
>
> On Apr 7, 2022, at 3:13 AM, Jürgen Schönwälder <
> j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 05:49:26PM -0700, IETF Secretariat wrote:
>
>
> The IETF WG state of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis has been changed to "WG
> Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up" from "Waiting for WG Chair Go-Ahead" by
> Kent
> Watsen:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis/
>
>
> Dear chairs,
>
> given recent discussions around ip addresses, I am not sure about the
> consensus
>
>
> I just moved the state back so it doesn't suggest consensus.
>
>
>  and perhaps we should consider to name the new date and time
> types differently, e.g.
>
>  date -> date-with-zone
>  date-no-zone -> date
>  time -> time-with-zone
>  time-no-zone -> time
>
> to avoid similar discussions in the future and to adopt a naming style
> where optional elements are reflected in the name instead of using a
> naming style where the absence of optional parts is reflected in the
> name.
>
>
>
> Here's what is intuitive to me:
>
> - date YYYY-MM-DD
> - time hh:mm:ss
>
>
+1

> Effectively your proposal.  I question if "date-with-zone" or
> "time-with-zone" are ever needed.    Certainly not "date-with-zone", as
> there is no way to reason about it.  As for "time-with-zone", I'm
> suspicious, as I've never seen it disconnected from a "date" before.
>
>
Perhaps the clue as to why these problems were not discovered until now.

> Kent // contributor
>
>
>
>

Andy

>
>
> /js
>
> --
> Jürgen Schönwälder              Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>