Re: timezones (was Re: Internals)

2003-01-13 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Martijn van Beers wrote: > The format of the time strings and the recurrence rules are defined > in the iCalendar rfc (2445). This was used because the primary use > of Date::Set was going to be Net::ICal. (not that I'm aware of > any other syntaxes to specify recurrences in)

Re: timezones (was Re: Internals)

2003-01-13 Thread Martijn van Beers
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 01:55:17PM -0600, Dave Rolsky wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Martijn van Beers wrote: > > > The format of the time strings and the recurrence rules are defined > > in the iCalendar rfc (2445). This was used because the primary use > > of Date::Set was going to be Net::ICal.

Re: timezones (was Re: Internals)

2003-01-13 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Martijn van Beers wrote: > gives: > [19700329T02..19701025T03], > [19710328T02..19711031T03], > [19720326T02..19721030T03] > > The format of the time strings and the recurrence rules are defined > in the iCalendar rfc (2445). This was

Re: timezones (was Re: Internals)

2003-01-14 Thread srl
On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 12:27:30AM -0600, Dave Rolsky ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Martijn van Beers wrote: > > > gives: > > [19700329T02..19701025T03], > > [19710328T02..19711031T03], > > [19720326T02..19721030T03] > > > > The format of the

Re: timezones (was Re: Internals)

2003-01-14 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, srl wrote: > > > gives: > > > [19700329T02..19701025T03], > > > [19710328T02..19711031T03], > > > [19720326T02..19721030T03] > > > > > > The format of the time strings and the recurrence rules are defined > > > in the iCalendar rfc (2445). This wa

Re: timezones (was Re: Internals)

2003-01-14 Thread Martijn van Beers
On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 12:27:30AM -0600, Dave Rolsky wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Martijn van Beers wrote: > > > gives: > > [19700329T02..19701025T03], > > [19710328T02..19711031T03], > > [19720326T02..19721030T03] > > > > The format of the time strings and th

Re: timezones (was Re: Internals)

2003-01-14 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Martijn van Beers wrote: > On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 12:27:30AM -0600, Dave Rolsky wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Martijn van Beers wrote: > > > > > gives: > > > [19700329T02..19701025T03], > > > [19710328T02..19711031T03], > > > [19720326T02..19721030

Re: base object (was: Re: timezones (was Re: Internals))

2003-01-13 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Rich Bowen wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, fglock wrote: > > > About "Rata Die" and "Julian Day": I'd prefer a seconds-based > > implementation, because leap seconds would make 'seconds' be a > > varying fraction, in a day-based calendar. > > Seems to me that there is a differen

Re: base object (was: Re: timezones (was Re: Internals))

2003-01-13 Thread Martijn van Beers
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 01:38:36PM -0500, Rich Bowen wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, fglock wrote: > > > About "Rata Die" and "Julian Day": I'd prefer a seconds-based > > implementation, because leap seconds would make 'seconds' be a > > varying fraction, in a day-based calendar. > > Seems to me th

Re: base object (was: Re: timezones (was Re: Internals))

2003-01-13 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, fglock wrote: > > You'd think 19700329T033000. And you'd be right most of the time, > > but not if that time was a Europe/Amsterdam time. Then, it'd > > be 19700329T043000. > > > > So, I think we need to either put all of this inside the base object, > > or make the base objec