On Thu, 26 May 2016 08:35:35 -0700, David said: >In my humble opinion time since epoch is not a good standard. Following is >the best practice I could come up with for our time needs. We store times >in ISO 8601 as UTC. You can use a decimal in the seconds field if for high >resolution. Since we want to know local time where the data was captured we >also store timezone info next to it but not instead of UTC. UTC is always >primary. For data sets of time info we use a double with seconds since the >ISO stamp. This is working well for us.
It all depends what you want to do and why, and that solution is obviously good in many cases. But remember that calendar dates like that are not always increasing, or even unique. ex: in much of North America when clocks go back in the autumn, there are two 01:00 in a day that has 25 hours. So in many use cases, a (micro)second counter from epoch is preferable if you're going to be doing elapsed time calculations for example. Cheers, -- ____________________________________________________________ Sean McBride, B. Eng [email protected] Rogue Research www.rogue-research.com Mac Software Developer Montréal, Québec, Canada _______________________________________________ Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion. [email protected] http://lists.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_lists.hdfgroup.org Twitter: https://twitter.com/hdf5
