My proposed fallback was the English name. Granted that isn't always very readable, however my point was that using UTC-XX isn't just potentially hard to read, but it's also wrong.
I don't mind standardizing the fallback behavior, or recommending fallback behavior, I don't want misleading fallback though :) -Shawn -----Original Message----- From: Norbert Lindenberg [mailto:ecmascr...@lindenbergsoftware.com] Sent: Saturday, March 2, 2013 11:09 AM To: Shawn Steele Cc: Norbert Lindenberg; Dean Landolt; Mark Davis ☕; Eric Albright; es-discuss; Phillips, Addison Subject: Re: Internationalization: Support for IANA time zones On Mar 2, 2013, at 8:11 , Shawn Steele wrote: > Re: UTC vs Tz names > > Sometimes UTC might be “enough”, or “almost enough”, but there’s a big > difference between Pacific Time and UTC-8, because sometimes it might be > UTC-7. So just using UTC doesn’t really help formatting (people want > something they’re familiar with), and it doesn’t really solve describing the > TZ, because at a different time of the year that offset might be different. Agreed, and if Microsoft or any other implementer wants to provide meaningful localized descriptions of all time zones in all languages, the spec certainly does not prevent that. The question was only whether the spec should describe a fallback to be used when an implementation doesn't have a meaningful localized description, and what that fallback should be. Norbert _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
