4 ms·

I've been dealing with time and timezones for a long time, but this is the first time I have ever seen the "[Olson/Name]" suffix. Is that actually standard?

Nekit1234007 2y ago
I've seen it being used in ECMAScript's Temporal https://tc39.es/proposal-temporal/docs/strings.html https://tc39.es/proposal-temporal/docs/strings.html
- alfiedotwtf 2y ago
  Ah, thank you. Now that I'm back at my desk I had to check ISO8601, that suffix is not included. However it does look like an extension - RFC 9557 - which looks like is still in proposed state. I would personally caution using these suffixes until wider adoption, because AFAIK the Olson database names themselves are not standardised on non-POSIX systems (i.e you might have a hard time on Windows).
  - lmz 2y ago
    The database names are standardized: https://www.iana.org/time-zones https://www.iana.org/time-zones The database itself may not be available but there are various implementations including Windows https://data.iana.org/time-zones/tz-link.html#software https://data.iana.org/time-zones/tz-link.html#software
    - alfiedotwtf 2y ago
      Aha! Yeah the last time I needed to play with timezones I had map between Olson and Windows's proprietary names. Looks like they came out their NIH Syndrome: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/archive/blogs/bclteam/exploring-windows-time-zones-with-system-timezoneinfo-josh-free https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/archive/blogs/bclteam/expl...
  - bakkoting 2y ago
    "Proposed" is the final state of many stable RFCs; see a list at [1], and compare it to the (much shorter) list of finished standards above it. The name is kind of misleading these days. Some discussion at [2]. Just to give an example, the base64 RFC 4648 is also a "proposed standard". [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards#PS https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards#PS [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7127#section-2 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7127#section-2
    - alfiedotwtf 2y ago
      Oh no... I've been treating "Proposed" as "Looks nice but I'll look at it when it gets out of proposed. Doh!
    - teohhanhui 2y ago
      In addition to RFC meaning Request for Comments, when in fact they're standards lol
burntsushi 2y ago
See for RFC 9557 document history: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9557/history/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9557/history/ I believe java.time also uses this syntax. I'm addition to Temporal. It enables lossless round-trips of zoned datetimes. See: https://docs.rs/jiff/latest/jiff/_documentation/comparison/index.html#jiff-losslessly-roundtrips-time-zone-aware-datetimes https://docs.rs/jiff/latest/jiff/_documentation/comparison/i...
- alfiedotwtf 2y ago
  Ah. Yep, that makes sense. Thanks!

Nekit1234007 2y ago

I've seen it being used in ECMAScript's Temporal https://tc39.es/proposal-temporal/docs/strings.html https://tc39.es/proposal-temporal/docs/strings.html

alfiedotwtf 2y ago
Ah, thank you. Now that I'm back at my desk I had to check ISO8601, that suffix is not included. However it does look like an extension - RFC 9557 - which looks like is still in proposed state. I would personally caution using these suffixes until wider adoption, because AFAIK the Olson database names themselves are not standardised on non-POSIX systems (i.e you might have a hard time on Windows).
- lmz 2y ago
  The database names are standardized: https://www.iana.org/time-zones https://www.iana.org/time-zones The database itself may not be available but there are various implementations including Windows https://data.iana.org/time-zones/tz-link.html#software https://data.iana.org/time-zones/tz-link.html#software
  - alfiedotwtf 2y ago
    Aha! Yeah the last time I needed to play with timezones I had map between Olson and Windows's proprietary names. Looks like they came out their NIH Syndrome: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/archive/blogs/bclteam/exploring-windows-time-zones-with-system-timezoneinfo-josh-free https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/archive/blogs/bclteam/expl...
- bakkoting 2y ago
  "Proposed" is the final state of many stable RFCs; see a list at [1], and compare it to the (much shorter) list of finished standards above it. The name is kind of misleading these days. Some discussion at [2]. Just to give an example, the base64 RFC 4648 is also a "proposed standard". [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards#PS https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards#PS [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7127#section-2 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7127#section-2
  - alfiedotwtf 2y ago
    Oh no... I've been treating "Proposed" as "Looks nice but I'll look at it when it gets out of proposed. Doh!
  - teohhanhui 2y ago
    In addition to RFC meaning Request for Comments, when in fact they're standards lol

burntsushi 2y ago

See for RFC 9557 document history: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9557/history/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9557/history/ I believe java.time also uses this syntax. I'm addition to Temporal. It enables lossless round-trips of zoned datetimes. See: https://docs.rs/jiff/latest/jiff/_documentation/comparison/index.html#jiff-losslessly-roundtrips-time-zone-aware-datetimes https://docs.rs/jiff/latest/jiff/_documentation/comparison/i...

alfiedotwtf 2y ago
Ah. Yep, that makes sense. Thanks!