1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org>)
id 1YIQx2-0006cX-C3 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:02:44 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org
designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender)
client-ip=80.91.229.3;
envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org;
helo=plane.gmane.org;
Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YIQx1-0000DH-3r
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:02:44 +0000
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org>)
id 1YIQws-0004zf-3f for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:02:34 +0100
Received: from e177084064.adsl.alicedsl.de ([85.177.84.64])
by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:02:34 +0100
Received: from andreas by e177084064.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1
(Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:02:34 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
From: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:02:28 +0100
Message-ID: <map36k$pkf$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <CAG86ZOxYh+=rny3sPHeJ0qs6R=5frLXERKmwhVECGHo7tkrz3w@mail.gmail.com> <CANEZrP3Tuw3mJLSuoOA4iOmg6u9sdh-E5NNm_FgdYs3Mx39znA@mail.gmail.com> <manr4t$c1a$1@ger.gmane.org> <54CF74A5.3050304@gk2.sk>
<mao0u5$gbu$1@ger.gmane.org> <54CF8E10.5040402@riseup.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: e177084064.adsl.alicedsl.de
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <54CF8E10.5040402@riseup.net>
X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
1.1 DKIM_ADSP_ALL No valid author signature,
domain signs all mail
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1YIQx1-0000DH-3r
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Export format for xpub
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:02:44 -0000
On 02/02/2015 03:47 PM, vv01f wrote:
>>> Uff, I would expect YYYYMMDD there so it's human readable as well.
>>
>> Those strings are not meant to be read by humans. YYYYMMDD is more
>> complicated than necessary, given that Bitcoin deals with seconds since
>> epoch everywhere.
>
> First that is a pitty .. as its simply a waste of storage.
>
> but back to Pavol's point: IMHO no harm to anything, as Bitcoin never
> has any valid timestamp below ~1230768000 (jan2009) and thus will always
> have 10 digits.. you can easily identify 8 char long timestamp as the
> proposed format.
> And there never is anything wrong with having a transparent, human
> readable option - especially when it saves 2 bytes in e.g. qr-codes.
Pavol's suggestion saves 2 chars only because its just a date. I think
the creation date should be at least precise to the hour, if not to the
minute.
But anyhow, if everyone prefers a human readble date format I will bow
to the majority.
|
