Date: 6 Apr 1996 23:25:01 -0000
Message-ID: <19960406232501.25289.qmail@koobera.math.uic.edu>
From: djb@koobera.math.uic.edu (D. J. Bernstein)
To: drums@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: timezones & Date

> Fine, but "sorting" is meaningless without a collating
> sequence

The collating sequence is Date, obviously.

What we're trying to do is define Date so that, among other things,
sorting by Date produces good results. It seems to me that sorting by
last modification time makes more sense than sorting by mailing time.
If a message has been delayed by three days, it should be at the top of
my list; I don't care whether the delay was caused by the user's failure
to send the message, or by his failure to dial into his ISP.

(Of course, it's also possible to sort by time of receipt, but Date
isn't used for that.)

---Dan