ken@csis.dit.csiro.au (Ken Yap) (10/16/90)
I wish Berkmail would use numeric timezones instead of three letter abbreviations in Date: lines. Australian Eastern Standard Time is also EST. (Hey, I didn't pick the abbreviation.) Thus mail sent my friends with Berkmail is interpreted as coming from the Eastern US (-0500) in the future. And at a time when the eastern seaboard is on EDT. Down with TLAs, let's go numeric. Grumble. Yet another reason to prefer MH.
argv@turnpike.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan Heller) (10/18/90)
In article <1990Oct16.002131.28178@csis.dit.csiro.au> ken@csis.dit.csiro.au (Ken Yap) writes: > I wish Berkmail would use numeric timezones instead of three letter > abbreviations in Date: lines. Australian Eastern Standard Time is also > EST. (Hey, I didn't pick the abbreviation.) Thus mail sent my friends Actually, it's AEST, not EST. But the standards say that timezones *outside* of the US must use numeric representations, not the ascii versions. Conversely, Mail *in* the US must use the 3-letter ascii abbreviations. why are you using Berkmail!? > Down with TLAs, let's go numeric. let's go with standards... But the -real- solution is to allow the MTA to supply the Date: header. > Grumble. Yet another reason to prefer MH. MH has nothing to do with this. In fact, if MH is adding a Date: header, it's yet another reason *not* to use MH. Mush provides a date header by default because there are many non-rfc compliant MTAs out there that people are using and Mush has to work with them. You can (and should) configure this out before building Mush if you use 822-complaint MTAs. Admittedly, the current version of Mush does not produce the correct 822-Date header for sites outside the US (because it uses the timezone abreviations rather than the numeric), but this will be fixed in the next patch being posted later this week. -- dan ---------------------------------------------------- O'Reilly && Associates argv@sun.com / argv@ora.com Opinions expressed reflect those of the author only.
wisner@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Bill Wisner) (10/18/90)
> Conversely, Mail *in* the US must use the 3-letter ascii >abbreviations. *Must*? Bill Wisner <wisner@hayes.fai.alaska.edu> Gryphon Gang Fairbanks AK 99775 "If you have a problem with one of my users, take it to me, and if I need to kill them, I will." -- Eliot Lear <lear@turbo.bio.net>
crissl@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (Stefan Linnemann) (10/18/90)
In <143826@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> argv@turnpike.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan Heller) writes: >In article <1990Oct16.002131.28178@csis.dit.csiro.au> ken@csis.dit.csiro.au (Ken Yap) writes: >> I wish Berkmail would use numeric timezones instead of three letter >> abbreviations in Date: lines. Australian Eastern Standard Time is also >> EST. (Hey, I didn't pick the abbreviation.) Thus mail sent my friends >Actually, it's AEST, not EST. But the standards say that timezones >*outside* of the US must use numeric representations, not the ascii >versions. Conversely, Mail *in* the US must use the 3-letter ascii >abbreviations. Which standards? And what idiots decided that only the US of A may use three letter abbreviations? Fine standards if they are as chaotic as you say they are. If we are to have standards, then let's keep them standard: either abbreviations or numbers, not a silly mixed mode. [rest deleted] Greetings, Stefan. -- Stefan M. Linnemann Internet: crissl@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl System programmer UNIX and MVS UUCP: ...!mcsun!hp4nl!rulcvx!crissl Leiden University, the Netherlands Bitnet: CRISSL@HLERUL2
Craig_Everhart@TRANSARC.COM (10/19/90)
Excerpts from netnews.comp.mail.misc: 17-Oct-90 Re: timezone names Dan Heller@turnpike.Eng. (1517) > Actually, it's AEST, not EST. But the standards say that timezones > *outside* of the US must use numeric representations, not the ascii > versions. Conversely, Mail *in* the US must use the 3-letter ascii > abbreviations. Nope--all mail may (and should) use numeric zones. RFC 822 allows numeric or military zones anywhere. RFC 1123 says the following (on page 55): There is a strong trend towards the use of numeric timezone indicators, and implementations SHOULD use numeric timezones instead of timezone names. However, all implementations MUST accept either notation. If timezone names are used, they MUST be exactly as defined in RFC-822. The military time zones are specified incorrectly in RFC-822: they count the wrong way from UT (the signs are reversed). As a result, military time zones in RFC-822 headers carry no information. Finally, note that there is a typo in the definition of "zone" in the syntax summary of appendix D; the correct definition occurs in Section 3 of RFC-822. Excerpts from netnews.comp.mail.misc: 17-Oct-90 Re: timezone names Dan Heller@turnpike.Eng. (1517) > > Down with TLAs, let's go numeric. > let's go with standards... > But the -real- solution is to allow the MTA to supply the Date: header. > > Grumble. Yet another reason to prefer MH. > MH has nothing to do with this. In fact, if MH is adding a Date: header, > it's yet another reason *not* to use MH. Mush provides a date header > by default because there are many non-rfc compliant MTAs out there that > people are using and Mush has to work with them. You can (and should) > configure this out before building Mush if you use 822-complaint MTAs. The RFCs say nothing about whether the user-agent program or the MTA program should provide a Date: header; they say only that the mail must have a Date: header by the time it leaves your MTA bound for another one. Sendmail set the precedent (NOT the ``standard'') that the MTA should provide the Date: header, but I think it's foolish to do it that way. This message left Transarc with a Date: header with a numeric time zone spec. I'm prepared to argue RFCs with all comers on that point. I have no idea where the impression came from that numeric zone IDs are not permitted to describe North American time zones. Let's not confuse fact with impression. Craig
argv@turnpike.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan Heller) (10/20/90)
In article <1990Oct18.015819.15543@hayes.ims.alaska.edu> wisner@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Bill Wisner) writes: > > Conversely, Mail *in* the US must use the 3-letter ascii > >abbreviations. > > *Must*? That was my impression before, but I think I was wrong about that. It's optional, I'm sure. -- dan ---------------------------------------------------- O'Reilly && Associates argv@sun.com / argv@ora.com Opinions expressed reflect those of the author only.
david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) (10/22/90)
argv@turnpike.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan Heller) writes: >Actually, it's AEST, not EST. But the standards say that timezones >*outside* of the US must use numeric representations, not the ascii >versions. Conversely, Mail *in* the US must use the 3-letter ascii >abbreviations. And of course in summer it becomes Australian Eastern Summer Time (AEST). :-) We use AEST/AEDT for internal usage but +1000/+1100 for mail. -- David Wilson Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au
bgg@pta.oz.au (Ben Golding) (10/22/90)
In article <143826@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> argv@turnpike.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan Heller) writes: >In article <1990Oct16.002131.28178@csis.dit.csiro.au> ken@csis.dit.csiro.au (Ken Yap) writes: >> Australian Eastern Standard Time is also >> EST. (Hey, I didn't pick the abbreviation.) Thus mail sent my friends > >Actually, it's AEST, not EST. Ahem. According to the Australian government legislation, it's EST. I don't know where you got AEST from but it's officially meaningless as a timezone within Australia. Ben.