Leap seconds for Date.parse

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Leap seconds for Date.parse

Peter van der Zee
While 15.9.1.1 explicitly says leap seconds are ignored by ECMAscript, the ISO
8601 timestamp format allows them.

15.9.1.15 (used by Date.parse) does dictate ranges for months and dates (days of
month), but they don't specify the range for hours, minutes and (milli)seconds
(although a note says 00 is the same as 24, fine). On the other hand, "the
number of x passed since y" can be interpreted as a range. But does this
interpretation come through the viewport of ECMAscript (ignoring leap seconds)
or the real world.

The last paragraph in 15.9.1.15 before the notes says to reject all dates it
cannot parse.

Now my question is, should "T23:59:60" be a valid timestamp as parsed by
Date.parse?

Which basically comes down to the question whether Date.parse should only parse
dates Ecmascript can produce itself or dates ISO 8601 could produce. If up in
the air, my vote goes to allow leap second notation. The current Firefox
implementation (for example) seems to reject it.

- peter
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Leap seconds for Date.parse

Allen Wirfs-Brock-2
(I've forward this to es5-discuss and deleted es-discuss from the to line)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:es-discuss-
> [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Peter van der Zee
> Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 9:00 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Leap seconds for Date.parse
>
> While 15.9.1.1 explicitly says leap seconds are ignored by ECMAscript, the ISO
> 8601 timestamp format allows them.
>
> 15.9.1.15 (used by Date.parse) does dictate ranges for months and dates (days
> of month), but they don't specify the range for hours, minutes and (milli)seconds
> (although a note says 00 is the same as 24, fine). On the other hand, "the
> number of x passed since y" can be interpreted as a range. But does this
> interpretation come through the viewport of ECMAscript (ignoring leap seconds)
> or the real world.
>
> The last paragraph in 15.9.1.15 before the notes says to reject all dates it cannot
> parse.
>
> Now my question is, should "T23:59:60" be a valid timestamp as parsed by
> Date.parse?
>
> Which basically comes down to the question whether Date.parse should only
> parse dates Ecmascript can produce itself or dates ISO 8601 could produce. If up
> in the air, my vote goes to allow leap second notation. The current Firefox
> implementation (for example) seems to reject it.
>
> - peter
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss