= Сообщение: 952 из 7127 ======================================= FTSC_PUBLIC = От : Michiel van der Vlist 2:280/5555 05 Jan 14 10:46:19 Кому : Maurice Kinal 05 Jan 14 10:46:19 Тема : all over but the crying? FGHI : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=2:280/5555+52c92d12 На : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=1:153/7001.0+52c826ef = Кодировка сообщения определена как: UTF-8 ================================== ============================================================================== Hello Maurice,
On Saturday January 04 2014 15:21, you wrote to me:
MK> Not so much action but confirmation regarding fts-4008.002 and MK> especially the part that states, and I quote;
MK> ------------------- quote starts MK> Implementations must NOT put a plus ('+', ASCII 43, 2Bh) in front of MK> the offset for positive numbers, but robust implementations should MK> be prepared to find (and ignore) a plus if it exists. MK> ------------------- quote ends
I can confirm, that is what it says.
MK> Given the above is obviously in error about usuage of the '+' MK> character
I disagree. It is not in error. It correctly documents how it is used in Fidonet.
MK> in real world standards for the proper usuage of utc offsets MK> I would appreciate any insight as to why the above quote from MK> fts-4008.002 ought to be adhered to.
Because that is current practise in Fidonet.
MK> Any and all robust implimentations I have witnessed in the last couple MK> of decades require either a '+' or '-' character to be considered MK> valid.
Not so in Fidonet.
MK> Offsets such as '0100' will be considered incomplete and produce an MK> error.
Not in Fidonet.
MK> The above quote is in contradiction to ALL standards currently MK> known to mankind with respect to utc offsets.
Not àll standards.
Taken a bit wider: In general it is nòt common practise in the real world to write positive integers with a preceding '+'. Only negative integers are written with a prefix denoting the sign. And that is how it is done in Fidonet. MK> I would muchly appreciate any and all illumination as to why MK> fts-4008.002 is considered a valid standard given the breakage it will MK> obviously cause to any and all proper implementations of utc offsets.
Irrelevant. It does not break anything WITHIN Fidonet.
MK> Also if one were to indeed deploy the '+' character in the TZUTC MK> kludge where appropriate would that be acceptable simply because of MK> the "prepared to find (and ignore) a plus if it exists" part?
No, it would nòt be acceptable as it goes against documented current practise.
