Re: [NGO] external module properties

Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> From: "Martin Bjorklund" <mbj@tail-f.com>
>>> How about adding an optional counter after the date?  So you can do
>>>
>>>   2008-04-29
>>>   2008-04-29:1
>>>   2008-04-29:2
>>>
>>> and so on.
>>>
>>> It removes the arbitrary timing constraint that worries Wes, and it's
>>> still simple enough for the common use case.
>> ...
>>
>> Even simpler - just use RFC 3339 date-time with the option of
>> abbreviating it to full-date.  That should be enough for even the
>> busiest believers in rapid prototyping.
> 
> That was my first thought as well, with the additional CLR to only use
> UTC, in order for simple string comparison to work.  But I thought a
> single integer would be simpler and do the job just fine.
> 
> If we do a single integer, we should use a dot instead of colon, as
> Andy suggested.
> 

I prefer the simple integer approach, but I can see how
others find the dateTime more 'standards-y'.

> 
> /martin
> 

Andy

_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
NGO@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo