[Cosmo-dev] eim timestamp format

[Morgen Sagen]

On Jan 3, 2007, at 4:27 PM, Brian Moseley wrote:
> it occurs to me that it would be better to represent an eim timestamp
> value as a standard unix timestamp than as a formatted utc date
> string. does that sound okay to everybody?

That's fine.


On Jan 3, 2007, at 4:45 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> I don't see any problem with it, although it seems to me that  
> there's no reason to have a primitive type for it in that case; we  
> might as well just use a "Decimal" subtype with an appropriate  
> number of digits, and no decimal places.  (In a similar way to how  
> we currently represent UUIDs as a "Bytes" subtype.)

Makes sense.