[#10193] String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...>

Hi,

41 messages 2007/02/05
[#10197] Re: String.ord — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/02/06

Hi,

[#10198] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#10199] Re: String.ord — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/02/06

David Flanagan wrote:

[#10200] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#10208] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10213] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10215] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10216] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/07

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10288] Socket library should support abstract unix sockets — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8597, was opened at 2007-02-13 16:10

12 messages 2007/02/13

[#10321] File.basename fails on Windows root paths — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8676, was opened at 2007-02-15 10:09

11 messages 2007/02/15

[#10323] Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...>

Some of the Ruby code used by TextMate makes use of xmlrpc/

31 messages 2007/02/15
[#10324] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2007/02/15

> -----Original Message-----

[#10326] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/15

On Feb 15, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Berger, Daniel wrote:

[#10342] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

While I am complaining about xmlrpc, we have another issue. It's

[#10343] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — Alex Young <alex@...> 2007/02/16

James Edward Gray II wrote:

[#10344] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

On Feb 16, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Alex Young wrote:

Re: Trouble with xmlrpc

From: Sam Roberts <sroberts@...>
Date: 2007-02-16 22:17:26 UTC
List: ruby-core #10346
On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 04:39:08AM +0900, James Edward Gray II wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Alex Young wrote:
> 
> >James Edward Gray II wrote:
> Fair warning:  this issue is certainly debatable.
> 
> Currently we send the time without any time-zone information.  It's  
> hard to see this as useful in anyway.  There is no way to add a time- 
> zone to the iso 8601 field the spec calls for either.

Why do you say that? Isn't the format of the dateTime.iso8601 field that
defined by ISO 8601?

ISO allows timezone specs,

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601#Time_zones
  
and ruby's Time class implements them:

	Time.now.iso8601 => "2007-02-16T14:05:44-08:00"
	Time.now.utc.iso8601 => "2007-02-16T22:05:59Z"

> Sadly the spec (http://www.xmlrpc.com/spec) is beyond useless when it  
> comes to addressing this issue:
> 
> "* What timezone should be assumed for the dateTime.iso8601 type?  
> UTC? localtime?
> 
> Don't assume a timezone. It should be specified by the server in its  
> documentation what assumptions it makes about timezones."

If the timezone is specified, there is no need to assume anything, the
assumption is only needed when no timezone is specified.

Sam


In This Thread