On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Bernard Devlin <bdrun...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hang on :-) I seem to remember Jacques saying recently that she'd > found that the internet date was more reliable across time zones than > storing seconds.
It all depends what you want :-) The seconds translates to a date & time that depends on the time zone settings of the computer doing the conversion, so the same number will translate differently around the world. This may be what you need, but it is not always useful. I used to operate a series of kiosks in multiple time zones across Australia. They would send their reports back with time stamps. If I had used seconds, then the times would have been altered by the time they got to me, but I needed to know the times as they were at the kiosk. e.g. if a kiosk in Western Australia has a problem at 4 pm, when this gets to me, it gets translated to 6 pm. It was at 6 pm my time, but if I have to ring up someone on site, I need to tell them that the problem was at 4, not 6. So for me, using the seconds was not useful. The internet date is one alternative, but it doesn't account for daylight savings. I ended up using my own time stamp routines, with an AppleScript routine for working out daylight savings. To avoid all these issues, there is an enhancement request in the Rev QA <http://quality.runrev.com/qacenter/show_bug.cgi?id=4949> asking for "the universal seconds" which would be a number of seconds that was not affected in any way by the time zone of the converting computer. Cheers, Sarah _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution