Re: Re: [FeedValidator] What timezones should be valid?

Mads Hjorth wrote:
> Is it way out of hand to recommend an ISO 8601 date instead?

In an RSS 2.0 feed, yes. The RSS 2.0 spec clearly says that dates should be 
in the form described in RFC 822 (with the additional requirement that years 
use four digits). If you just choose your own format at random, how would 
you expect an RSS reader to understand what you meant?

In short, if you want your dates to be understood, stick to the format as 
specified.

If you really find RFC 822 dates that offensive, you could always choose an 
entirely different feed format as Sam has suggested. Either way, though, 
you're never going to be able to use CET as a timezone.

Bill Kearney wrote:
> In the end you're far better off using the numeric offsets.  Which are
> offsets from UTC, as it's actually possible for GMT itself to be offset 
> due
> to daylight savings.

Perhaps I've misunderstood what you're saying, but just to be clear, GMT 
never changes as a result of daylight savings. Britain does have a form of 
daylight savings (referred to as British Summer Time or BST), but that is 
defined as GMT+1 (GMT itself doesn't change).

As I understand it, the difference between UTC and GMT has to do with atomic 
time measurement vs. astronomical calculations. For the most part the 
differences are insignificant.

Regards
James



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-public/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-public/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/