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:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DATETIME Home

DATETIME Home

DATETIME  February 2011

DATETIME February 2011

Subject:

Re: Revised spec

From:

Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Wed, 9 Feb 2011 16:52:54 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (150 lines)

Saašha, thanks much for the comments.

> From: Saašha Metsärantala
> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 3:18 PM

> > the W3C built-in schema types
> I may be useful to specify which schema version is meant.

What do you recommend? As I understand there is only one official version at present, 1.0. Version 1.1 hasn't been approved as far as I can tell. Does it matter though? Are any of the built-in types affected by the new version?

 
> > 109 Date and time (with colon)
> 109 Date (with hyphen) and time (with colon)

Fixed.

 
> > 203 need use case
> When the source reads 19th century (without specification of how the
> century is defined in this case)
>
> > 203 • 19 20th century • 00 first century
> We could reserve the term “century” to apply ONLY when the source uses
> the term “century” (or its equivalent in another language) without
> defining it. Thus, we would avoid any “wrong” definition of the the
> term “century“.
> When all the hundred years from 1901 (inclusive) to 2000 (inclusive)
> are meant, we could use 1900-01-01/P100Y. When all the hundred years
> from 1900
> (inclusive) to 1999 (inclusive) are meant, we could use either 1901-01-
> 01/P100Y

Ok, I've changed the status of "century" and added a note.

I also changed "Interval: start and duration", 211, status to "confirmed requirement".

(Note: 212, "Interval: duration and end" not affected, still need use case.)


 
> > 205
> When the capacity of computer memory was very limited, the month was
> sometimes (albeit seldom) written in hexadecimal. 85c18 was then
> december, 18th 1985. There is a risk for 1995109 to be missinterpreted
> as the ninth january 1995

I don't see the risk. It is unabiguously clear in ISO 8601 that a 7-digit value is a year and julian day. But it's not worth bothering with at this point until a use case is supplied.


 
> > 210 20040101/20040102
> It could be good to specify why not use hyphens such as:
> 2004-01-01/2004-01-02

I added hyphens in 210, 211, and 212.



> > 213 the last of which occurs at
> It could be good to specify whether it begins or ends then

Changed "occurs" to "end", as I think that is the intent of ISO 8601. But this again is one that needs a use case (and I'm hoping we can remove it).


>
> > 215 T01:59:60
> There is an obvious risk to misinterpret that as a leap second

Another one currently without a use case, so no use trying to fix it until there is one.


> > 301 to 311
> In the rightmost column, there is a typo: “co'on”

Fixed.


>
> > 316
> Square braces are quite error-prone as they make regexes more
> complicated for example. I would prefer c1667,1668,1670..1672 (with “c”
> for “choice”) instead of [1667,1668,1670..1672]

We'll have to make this a separate thread.


 
> > 317 and 317 1
> Nothing on these rows indicates that it would be about approximations.
> If it is not an approximation, these rows should be move to a place not
> under this table header.

Created a separate section, "Multiple Dates", for these two.



> would prefer a1667,1668,1670..1672 (with “a” for all) instead of
> {1667,1668,1670..1672} because curly braces are error-prone both when
> it comes to regexes and XSLT where curly braces are used for attribute
> value templates. I consider that 2002-10-{03,05,09-12} could be
> rewritten
> 2002-10-a03,05,09..12 (with doubble dots as of 316, cf 323)

Separate thread.


>
> > 319 to 322
> I suggest to use double dots instead of double dashes (cf 317, 323)

We already use double dots, see 317 ”double-dot indicates all the values between the two values it separates, inclusive."


> > 325
> We could explore the possibilities to use QName as defined at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#QName

Separate thread.


> > 329
> It seems that “caret” is misspelled “carat”.

Fixed.



>
> > 330 Should both syntaxes be supported or only one?
> The dotless version makes it easier to avoid non-integer values

Yes, we need further discussion on this.


> > 331
> Each winter in the northern hemisphere and summer in the south
> hemisphere covers two years. Maybe we should also introduce 25, 26, 27,
> 28. If 22 is the summer in the northern hemispere, 25 could be the part
> of the summer at the beginning of the year in the southern hemisphere
> and 26 could be the part of the summer at the end of the year in the
> southern hemisphere.
> Likewise, 27 and 28 could be used for the winter in the northern
> hemispere

It is my understanding that the proposed solution satisfies the requirement that has been presented. I would prefer that someone indicate that they want southern hemisphere seasons represented separately before we try to represent them.

Thanks again!

--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