Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> writes:
>>>>>> On Fri, 22 Sep 2023, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >>>>>> On Fri, 22 Sep 2023, Florian Schmaus wrote: >>> Some, including me, consider timestamps without timezone specifiers to >>> be in local time (either of the consumer or producer of the >>> timestamp). Hence, if you really must have UTC here, then at least >>> consider making it explicit my requiring the 'Z' timezone specifier >>> (which, if you want to be ISO compatible, probably means that the >>> timestamp must include HH:MM too). > >> How about converting package.mask to XML? The xs:date type would allow >> a date followed by a time zone [1]. > >> /me hides > > Seriously, this isn't a hill I am willing to die on. I still prefer UTC > there, but I'd be fine if the wording said "should" instead of "must". Yes, I want the UTC bit in there, but it's fine if it's "should" and not "must". I was trying to articulate that before but I didn't do so very clearly. > > Ulrich
