ljdickey@watmath.UUCP (09/05/83)
I noticed recently a problem that was experienced by someone receiving messages apparently before it was sent (the dreaded "BST" problem: British Summer Time, Bering Strait Time). It seems clear that there is no way to resolve this problem by introducing local interpretations to such symbols that everybody's mail program is supposed to understand. Our net is "coming of age" now, and we need to adjust to the problem of a regional net (that started out largely North American) growing into one that is worldwide. Other nets have experienced and faced up to this problem, and have come repeatedly to the same solution, namely that the only sensible thing to do is to use just ONE time that everybody understands. One notable recent example is the Sharp APL Timesharing Service which is based in Toronto, but which serves users in far flung places. They use a date and time system based on Coordinated Universal Time (what used to be called Greenwich Mean Time). I propose that we adopt the notion of a time stamp for our messages (mail and news) that gives the date and time in an international standard format. It is not expected that any user will ever have to read that format, but it will be decipherable. When the user sends a message, an "SIDate:" line is included: the date that is included is the SI (International Standard) date and time (Greenwich Mean Time). When any other user reads the message the date and time will be printed according to whatever time has been chosen for that site. For example, if it is 2:35 in the afternoon, Eastern Daylight Savings Time on the 5th of September (where I am), the SIDate line would be something like: SIDate: 1983 09 05 18:35:19 or SIDate: 1983 09 05 18 35 19 and there would be no other designation such as EDT or Mon. A reader of that message who is at a site on the west coast of North America would be given a date like Date: Mon, Sep. 5 11:35 A.M. which would be the time it was there when the message was sent. Similarly, a user in Britain might get a date message like Date: Mon, Sep. 5 7:35 P.M. Because that is the time and date, as calculated by the mail program, assuming that it is British Summer Time, when the message was sent. Note that at each site there need be only two kinds of conversions: one from the current local time to GMT and one that is the inverse. No site has to know about the time convention that is used at any other site. -- Lee Dickey (ljdickey@watmath.UUCP) ...!allegra!watmath!ljdickey ...!ucbvax/decvax!watmath!ljdickey University of Waterloo
crc@clyde.UUCP (09/14/83)
Isn't there a J military time zone? floyd!clyde!crc
nather@utastro.UUCP (09/16/83)
Astronomers have, for a long time, faced the timezone problem and have
arrived at a workable solution: use "Universal Coordinated Time" as
broadcast by WWV (and others) for all time records. Local sites can
translate this into "local time" if they so choose, although in many cases
it won't matter to anybody but the mailer.
Ed Nather
...ihnp4!kpno!utastro!nathercathy@ru-cs44.UUCP (Cathy Garlick) (10/01/83)
Why all this persistence with military time zones? Personally i
wouldn't want anything to do with the military. Why not stick
to Greenwich Mean Time? At least then we all know what we're
on about.
Cathy Garlick ({vax135,mcvax}!ukc!ru-cs44!cathy)mark@cbosgd.UUCP (10/02/83)
In the first place, there is no master list of time zones. I have hunted far and wide and can't find any such list. I am sure that if such a list existed, it would have ambiguities. For example, BST= British Summer Time/Bering Standard Time. I think we've agreed that GMT for internal purposes is good, with display in local time. Mark
msc@qubix.UUCP (Mark Callow) (10/04/83)
I second Cathy Garlick. Just stick to Greenwich Mean Time (even if
you call it Coordinated Universal Time). It's far simpler than trying to
muck with all those military time zones.
Take a tip from your favourite operating system. Unix keeps time in GMT.
--
Mark Callow, Saratoga, CA.
...{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!decwrl!
...{ittvax,amd70}!qubix!msc
decwrl!qubix!msc@Berkeley.ARPApiet@mcvax.UUCP (Piet Beertema) (10/07/83)
Long time ago wise men agreed the world needed some kind of time standard.
So they got together and created it. They called it Greenwich Mean Time
and it served men's purpose. Long, long time after that, when the war machine
was spreading all over this planet and entered outer (?) space, the military
- as usual - thought they could come up with something better. That they
called ARPA standard and it served THEIR purpose.
Then UNIX came into existence and it adopted GMT. And a news system was
developed for it and for some reason adopted ARPA standard.
Now, pray tell, what is this network meant for?
A military network spreading the Gospel of the Gun?
Or a civil network for the spreading of Knowledge?
Well then, let's stick to UNIX's timebase, the good old, simple and civil,
GMT standard.
--
Piet Beertema
Center for Math. & Comp. Science, Amsterdam
...{decvax,philabs}!mcvax!pietlee@west44.UUCP (Lee McLoughlin) (10/08/83)
I too dislike the idea of military time zones.
For heavens sake why can't we (the net) just get together and make up a list
of all the time zone names and once we're all agreed stuff them into getdate!!
Any new site is going to use whatever the local time zone name is any how,
such as all the UK sites did in using BST, so may as well make it official.
I'm afraid I cannot volunteer for collater, or whatever, since the local network
connections are in a state of change.
--
Lee McLoughlin ({ENGLAND}!ukc!root44!west44!lee)mike@taurus.UUCP (10/09/83)
I'd like to add a great big YES if anybody is going to take a vote for GMT! You could call it UTC if the tie up with somewhere in Britain offends on grounds of chauvinism, but at least it's the internationally agreed standard for dating messages on other forms of transmission systems. Mike Banahan.