According to Vince LaMonica: > On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Adam Powell wrote: > } Is it still true that use_doc_date expects dates in ISO-8601 format > } (YYYY-MM-DD)? > > Yes, as I just recently found out. Though according to RFC 1945, section > 10.10 [for HTTP/1.0] and RFC 2068, section 14.29 [for HTTP/1.1], RFC 1123 > *is* the standard date format for meta date tags, not ISO 8601.
RFC 1945 and 2068 specify the standard for the HTTP protocol, not for the format of meta date tags. The only meta tags that would be governed by these RFCs would be <meta name="http-equiv" ...>. However, these RFCs do state that dates in HTTP headers can be in RFC 1123, RFC 850, OR "asctime" format, and that HTTP clients should recognize all 3. I don't think htdig ever did handle asctime format. It's not likely a big deal, because I don't recall anyone ever complaining about it, but then for the sake of completeness maybe the date parsing code should allow asctime too. > } If possible, I'd like to use meta tags with this format > } 20 NOVEMBER 2002 > > It would need to be altered in htdig's source code. Depending on your site > structure, it is probably easier to edit your w3 site to conform to > htdig's ISO8601 datestamp. If your site uses PHP, you can use date() or > gmdate() to create a proper datestamp. I use a datetimestamp in a mysql > table and actually pull that data to feed to the META headers. According to Jim Cole: > Newer snapshots (not sure since when) currently support some other > formats; however I don't believe the format you specify above is > covered. The fact that other formats are supported appears almost to be > an accident, so I am not sure how stable that support is. As of March 12, htdig allowed RFC 1123, RFC 850 and ISO 8601 dates in HTTP headers and meta date tags. Allowing ISO 8601 in HTTP headers was a side-effect of using the same parsing code for both uses, but I saw it as harmless enough as it wouldn't cause it to get tripped up on any valid HTTP date formats. Allowing all 3 in meta date tags was more deliberate, as there seems to be a lot of different formats in use in these tags. However I believe the standard format for this is set by Dublin Core as ISO 8601. In any case, I don't expect support for all these formats to be pulled unless someone demonstrates that it causes problems. However, neither RFC 850 or 1123 use full month names, but only 3 letter abbreviations, so that's all that HtDateTime::Parse allows right now. It would be pretty trivial to tweak it to skip over any extra letters after the first 3. -- Gilles R. Detillieux E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Spinal Cord Research Centre WWW: http://www.scrc.umanitoba.ca/ Dept. Physiology, U. of Manitoba Winnipeg, MB R3E 3J7 (Canada) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en _______________________________________________ htdig-general mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, send a message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with a subject of unsubscribe FAQ: http://htdig.sourceforge.net/FAQ.html
