I believe the consolidated table contains an error. Section 2 subsection
"Extension and Precision" rightmost column last bullet says "The year
zero is represented as '-000001'." But of course the notation other than
AD/BC or CE/BCE that is most widely known is astronomical year
numbering, in which the year 0 would be represented as 0000 in ISO 8601
notation. It is the year 1 BC that would be represented as '-000001'
when a profile had been agreed to that required six digits for expanded
Please see page 7 of ISO 8601:2004.
On 2010-08-05 5:40 PM, Denenberg, Ray wrote:
> I have taken The EDTF proposals and suggestions from listserv and other discussion and have tried to consolodate them into a single table, at http://www.loc.gov/standards/datetime/features.html
> which now attempts to capture all of the features that have at some point been discussed. The table provides a list of features, an example for each feature, and for an "extended" feature (one not supported by ISO 8601) a syntax is proposed.
> Comments are solicited. The most useful comments would be challenges, along the lines of "why do we need this feature?" For any challenged feature, if nobody steps up to defend it, it will be removed.