I have not thought much about how to solve this problem and I suggest that
we not get sidetracked into engineering a solution, until someone speaks up
and claims that this is a requirement.
--Ray
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Edward C. Zimmermann
> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 3:01 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [DATETIME] Before/after indicator LAST CALL
>
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 16:33:07 +0100, [UTF-8?]SaaÅ¡ha Metsärantala wrote
> > Hello!
> >
> > > # 318 [...] its syntax.
> > What about the following syntax? For consistency, I would suggest:
> >
> > uuuu-uu-uu/1760-12-03
> >
>
> I do not agree.
>
> What does "before 3 Dec 1760" mean? Is it an interval or a specific
> date?
>
> To my reading it is a specific date: date < 1760-12-03
>
>
> > instead of
> >
> > .bf.1760-12-03
> >
> > likewise, I would suggest:
> >
> > 1760-12-03/2011-03-10
> >
> > (replacing "2011-03-10" by the day when the document came to the
> > library or archive, etc. or another appropriate day) instead of
> >
> > .ea.1760-12-03
>
> Since 1760-12-03 can be the inteval ending with "now" or it can be
> date > 1760-12-03 Again to my reading for the "bf." prefix it is a
> specific date value (a point} and not an interval.
> Albert Einstein was born 03-14-1879
> Albert Einstein lived 03-14-1879/04-18-1955 the before and after
> prefix could be applied to the date of bith but, I would argue, not the
> other.
>
> An expression such as Einstein was born between 01-14-1879 and 06-12-
> 1900 is logically correct as a singleton but expressed as an interval
> would be absurd.
>
>
>
> > Regards!
> >
> > [UTF-8?]Saašha,
>
>
> --
>
> Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB
> http://www.nonmonotonic.net
> Umsatz-St-ID: DE130492967
|