[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RFC 2445 Q: is TZID broken?

To: Mark Swanson <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: RFC 2445 Q: is TZID broken?
From: pregen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:37:37 -0500
Cc: ietf-calendar@xxxxxxx, owner-ietf-calendar@xxxxxxxxxxxx
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-calendar/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-calendar.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-calendar-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Sender: owner-ietf-calendar@xxxxxxxxxxxx

On January 22, 2003 02:53 pm, mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>Would it be feasible to say that it may have fallen off of the radar scope 

>because strings like "US-Eastern" are just identifiers and the real time 
zone 
>definition is in VTIMEZONE (which can define any past/present/future time 

>zone including daylight savings)?

Not really.  It fell off the radar screen because of time constraints for 
people.  It had nothing to do with where it fell in the draft.  It was 
where it fell on people's time schedules...

Follow-Ups:
- Re: RFC 2445 Q: is TZID broken?
  - From: John Stracke

Prev by Date: Re: No partial success when it comes to deletion?
Next by Date: Re: No partial success when it comes to deletion?
Previous by thread: Re: RFC 2445 Q: is TZID broken?
Next by thread: Re: RFC 2445 Q: is TZID broken?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread