| The translations that were purposely cut from the post: Chunk 1 Unlike the day of the week and the date, %s and %z are independent, so I don't see the problem.
> Here, independent means orthogonal, so changing one doesn't change the other. It doesn't mean there is a problem, it just means they are different.
For example, it is possible to write a date in UTC and then change it to local time.
But this time it's only %s. Suppose I am in Japan and dealing with UTC time.
Let's say I'm in Japan and I'm dealing with UTC time.
The given time is in UTC, but I'll refer to it as +09:00. 2001-02-03T04:05:06 UTC (+0900) Since this is not common
DateTime.parse('2001-02-03T04:05:06').new_offset('+0900')
This is not common, so the description would be something like Now, this kind of description is not currently in ruby, but I feel that what is required for the '%s %z' thing is something different from what we have been dealing with, which from my point of view includes this kind of thing. Chunk 2 Perhaps if you could elaborate a bit more on what a date is or something like that, it might make it more understandable. When I say date, I am including such time.
I think of this date as a kind of name assigned on a time axis based on certain rules. In space, it is like a milestone.
There are actually more imperfect dates, which are also dates.
Sometimes they can be identified by context and other information, and sometimes they can't. Chunk 3 If you think the time difference has special significance, you can describe it in local time.
>
> The question is which local time, not the local time set by the OS, but an artificial local time with a > fixed difference from UTC.
> > I understand that you are talking about being able to record the given time difference as is.
> I understand that you are saying that the given time difference can be recorded as it is. I'm not sure what you mean. Since %s seems incomplete to begin with, I don't know why you are so hung up on it. If we replace %s with space, we can't place milestones with it, it just shows the distance, and we can't define the distance, can we? Also, just for the record, I would like to confirm that what Mr. Tanaka is referring to as fixed time difference is not universal. The given self-evident local time is also useful, and the time zone = time zone information, not time difference.
It contains more information than just time difference. Isn't it important to have the actual time system and format we are referring to, such as daylight saving time?
In that sense as well, I feel uncomfortable with the trend of %s bias. |
> What I call a date includes time. It's like a name given on a point on the time axis.
And now it's:
> When I say date, I am including such time. I think of this date as a kind of name assigned on a time axis based on certain rules. In space, it is like a milestone. There are actually more imperfect dates, which are also dates. Sometimes they can be identified by context and other information, and sometimes they can't.
What information did we gain?
Anyway, in chunk 1 you said:
> Since this is not common DateTime.parse('2001-02-03T04:05:06').new_offset('+0900') This is not common, so the description would be something like
But that's not a correct sentence, I changed it to:
> Since this is not common, the description would be something like DateTime.parse('2001-02-03T04:05:06').new_offset('+0900').