LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for DATETIME Archives


DATETIME Archives

DATETIME Archives


DATETIME@C4VLPLISTSERV01.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DATETIME Home

DATETIME Home

DATETIME  August 2010

DATETIME August 2010

Subject:

Re: EDTF Features list

From:

Andy Mabbett <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 5 Aug 2010 23:02:39 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (41 lines)

On Thu, August 5, 2010 22:40, 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.

Ray,

That's very useful. It chimes nicely with work currently underway on the
HTML5 working group wiki, to gather evidence in support of the use of such
values in the new <TIME> element:

   http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Time_element

I urge people to view the issues listed there; and the prior discussions
linked at the foot of that page.

Perhaps, instead of challenges and defences, we should adopt the same
model, and gather evidence of existing use (on the web or in other
systems); and use-cases?

I've already made reference to the EDTF efforts on that page; and asked
participants there to collaborate with this work.

I do know that the lack of a standard for marking up uncertain or
pre-Gregorian dates is of particular interest to colleagues in the museum,
archaeology and archives sector; and has restricted my work on the
emission of metadata from Wikipeda.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2019
February 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
January 2018
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
August 2016
July 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
December 2014
November 2014
March 2014
September 2013
May 2013
February 2013
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
May 2012
March 2012
December 2011
November 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager