New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(09 Nov 2024 09:48 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Alex Shinn
(09 Nov 2024 11:49 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(10 Nov 2024 19:52 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
John Cowan
(11 Nov 2024 03:49 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Alex Shinn
(11 Nov 2024 04:33 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Arthur A. Gleckler
(09 Nov 2024 17:36 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Pierpaolo Bernardi
(10 Nov 2024 00:56 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Arthur A. Gleckler
(10 Nov 2024 04:28 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Pierpaolo Bernardi
(10 Nov 2024 05:06 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(10 Nov 2024 10:11 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Pierpaolo Bernardi
(10 Nov 2024 15:02 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(10 Nov 2024 15:37 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Lassi Kortela
(10 Nov 2024 15:57 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Alex Shinn
(11 Nov 2024 04:43 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(10 Nov 2024 10:19 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(03 Jan 2025 12:43 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (03 Jan 2025 14:08 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(03 Jan 2025 14:56 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(03 Jan 2025 15:03 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(03 Jan 2025 15:26 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(03 Jan 2025 15:22 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Daphne Preston-Kendal
(03 Jan 2025 20:45 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
Alex Shinn
(05 Jan 2025 23:10 UTC)
|
Re: New pre-SRFI: Modern date and time library
John Cowan
(06 Jan 2025 01:12 UTC)
|
I may have more comments soon, but here is one about the initial definitions as this proposed SRFI does want to do everything right if possible (which is a good thing IMO): Reading the definition of the TAI calendar, it can sound as if there were an absolute time (otherwise, the phrase "every 86,400 SI seconds" would not make sense). However, atomic clocks are precise enough to detect the derivations of Newtonian mechanics from special and general relativity. As there is no god-given absolute clock one has to take an arbitrary clock as a reference. A suitable reference is precisely the TAI clock, measuring seconds since the event that is called "1 January 1958" in the TAI calendar. Note that the phrase "at midnight on 1 January 1958" does not make sense before the definition of any calendar (or, at least, has the danger of being a self-referential definition). With the TAI clock set as a reference, the TAI and the UTC calendar can then be derived through simple arithmetic. Am Fr., 3. Jan. 2025 um 13:43 Uhr schrieb Daphne Preston-Kendal <xxxxxx@nonceword.org>: > > I have posted a new version of the pre-SRFI. Apart from the changes mentioned in my mail to Antero, I have also added local ‘clock-times’ as requested by Arthur, and explicitly noted the ISO 8601 correspondences for each data type provided. Also, there’s now a helpful table of contents at the top so the structure can be seen more easily. > > <https://gitlab.com/dpk/presrfis/-/blob/master/date-time.md> > > Apart from the specifications of procedures which currently have a header line only, whose meaning should generally be obvious from the name, I think this is a reasonably good starting point to begin to move towards SRFI submission. At the very least, the data model feels good, which is the main thing I was concerned about getting right in advance before moving towards submission, and thus implementation. > > If there are no major objections, I will give Arvydas the green light to start working on implementing the rest of the spec, and then we’ll submit as soon as he feels ready. > > > Daphne >