anatoly techtonik <[email protected]> added the comment:
Let's quote RFC 3339:
"""
4.3. Unknown Local Offset Convention
If the time in UTC is known, but the offset to local time is unknown,
this can be represented with an offset of "-00:00". This differs
semantically from an offset of "Z" or "+00:00", which imply that UTC
is the preferred reference point for the specified time. RFC2822
[IMAIL-UPDATE] describes a similar convention for email.
"""
The phrase "this CAN be represented" doesn't mean that it SHOULD be
represented. Do we have information to decide if offset to local zone is
unknown or if UTC is the preferred reference point for specified time? I guess
no, and I am afraid that most users just don't care or don't want to bog into
details - all they need is a good Atom looking timestamp. As we are not aiming
at making a reference library for generating all possible forms of valid RFC
3339 timestamps, it makes sense to use 'Z' in the end because it is easier to
handle.
rfcformat(dt).replace("Z", "-00:00") in case somebody need a -00:00 is easier
than reverse operation if you need 'Z' in the end:
dstr = rfcformat(dt)
if dstr.endswith("-00:00") or dstr.endswith("+00:00"):
dstr = dstr[:-6] + 'Z'
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <[email protected]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue7584>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
