That being said, I would happily support it if we settle on an
agreement. Would be a good thing.
Am 04.06.2022 um 12:39 schrieb Jens Geyer:
jiayuliu wrote:
> Taking a step back, I wonder if we can standardize on a paved path
> for adding newer standalone types in terms of requiredness/optional,
> plugin mechanism, and/or the level of language support, e.g. if I
> want to add support for date/time/timestamp, following ISO 8601,
> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601,] is that necessarily a
> good idea to be a standalone type?
Date and timestamps are a good topic a s well, although also a more
complicated one. We discussed that shortly in the past (years ago I
might add) and came to thne conclusion that because of the sheer
plethora of different systems w/regard what systems expect to be a good
date/time format onm the market it is quite hartd to come to one way
that satisfies all sides:
Main thgings to consider:
* what is the offset? i.e. what is date null?
* what is the precision to store?
* is there a (good) way to handle it available for each language?
I'm personally would be thankful if we have some good timestamp data
type, but I also see the problems with it.
JensG
PS: What you mean by "in terms of requiredness/optional"? How is that
related?
