KDateTime: next iteration

[Nicolas Goutte]

On Tuesday 29 November 2005 11:46, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 November 2005 11:11, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> > >On Monday 28 November 2005 21:50, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > >> David Jarvie wrote:
> > >> >  UTC
> > >> >   Offset from UTC
> > >>
> > >> What's the difference between those two? UTC is UTC + 0 (or -0, if
> > >> you'd rather), so it's the same as an offset from UTC.
> > >
> > >07:20 +0000 (UTC) is not the same as 08:20 +0100 ("Offset from UTC")
> >
> > So we have 1500 types of timezones? One for each possible minute of the
> > 25-hour span of timezones?
>
> No, we have simply a time offset. That is the current state of the
> discussions.
>
> > I thought David listed 5 types.
> >
> > >It could become useful for example if Konqueror uses KDateTime instead
> > > of seconds since the epoch. In that case, you can use it in the FISH
> > > KIO slave to tell that you have no idea about the timezone, as it is an
> > > information thatthe FISH protocol does not transmit.
> >
> > FISH should be modified to transmit it. All it has to do is set TZ=UTC
> > before sending anything.
>
> Well, as far as I understand, FISH is supposed to work with other FISH
> servers. (However I am not sure if it is really supported now).
>
> Also I am not sure that the TZ trick works on Windows. (However there,
> /dev/ null is probably a problem too, as reported.)
>
> Of course, FISH is only an example. I am sure that there are other cases.
> (I can think about RFC 2822's -0000 time offset.)

The difference is that KDateTime considers such a time being by default a 
local time, while RFC 2822 assumes that such a time is UTC.

>
(...)

Have a nice day!