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  January 2011

DATETIME January 2011

Subject:

EDTF as a simple type

From:

Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Tue, 11 Jan 2011 15:53:27 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (38 lines)

> From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 1:14 PM

> Implicitly, the document seems to take for granted that information in
> all of these forms should be representable in what XSD refers to as a
> simple type.  But why?

Here is some additional (unpublished) historical background. 

We've maintained a number of xml schemas here,
MODS http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/mods.xsd
MADS http://www.loc.gov/standards/mads/mads.xsd
METS http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/mets.xsd
PREMIS http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/premis.xsd
and others, going on ten years now, and the community that uses these
schemas has all along had interest in an enhanced datatype that incorporates
these edtf features, but it was the PREMIS effort (the last of those listed)
that was the catalyst for the edtf initiative. 

If you look at that schema, near the bottom you will see an edtfSimpleType
that defines several regular expressions incorporating several of these
features and combines them with xs:date and xs:dateTime into an enhanced
simpleType for use in validating PREMIS data. (Note these are way out of
date, the PREMIS schema has not kept up with the changes in the edtf draft.)
So any normal date or dateTime will validate, but only very rudimentary
validation works for any of the enhanced features (e.g. you can't validate
that the month is less than 12, or that if the month is November the day is
30 or less, etc.) because the regular expressions can ony do so much without
becoming unbearably complex. 

I suppose the point is, we are hoping that if this datatype becomes accepted
as a standard, then those who implement software that already validates xs
types will simply add support for these edtf features to that software. (As
opposed to trying to do it via regular expressions which is not a good
approach.)

--Ray

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