Path: utzoo!utstat!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!amgraf!cpsolv!rhg
From: rhg@cpsolv.UUCP (Richard H. Gumpertz)
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Re: Is anyone interested in putting local time in the "Date:" header?
Message-ID: <459@cpsolv.UUCP>
Date: 1 Dec 89 20:46:04 GMT
References: <2184@coconut.bbn.com> <4309@helios.ee.lbl.gov> <10226@ucsd.Edu>
Reply-To: rhg@cpsolv.uucp (Richard H. Gumpertz)
Organization: Computer Problem Solving, Leawood, Kansas
Lines: 15

In article <10226@ucsd.Edu> brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor) writes:
>
>You could just include it after the date on the same line, if you wish.
>e.g.,
>	Date: 29 Nov 89 12:53:48 GMT -0800

The above doesn't meet any standards for time transmission.  Why invent yet
another syntax?  What is wrong with the following?
	Date: 29 Nov 89 04:53:48 -0800
Computers are good at adding back the 8 hours if you really want GMT.
-- 
===============================================================================
| Richard H. Gumpertz rhg%cpsolv@uunet.uu.NET -or- ...uunet!amgraf!cpsolv!rhg |
| Computer Problem Solving, 8905 Mohawk Lane, Leawood, Kansas 66206-1749      |
===============================================================================