It seems to me that the discussion of season and hemisphere has run its
course. Although there are interesting approaches suggested to solve some
of the hypothetical complex features mentioned, it does not appear that
anyone requires these features, and that the only firm requirement has been
posed by Bruce, who is happy with the simple solution:
And that solution currently allows for a qualifier, where the value of the
qualifier is yet to be developed. However I propose to remove the qualifier
altogether. If anyone still sees value in keeping the qualifier in the spec
please make a case for it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Edward C. Zimmermann
> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 10:55 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [DATETIME] season and hemisphere
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 09:53:26 -0500, Bruce D'Arcus wrote
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 6:56 AM, [UTF-8?]SaaÅ¡ha Metsärantala
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >> not need anything so specific as
> > >> location or country: it would only need something that says
> > >> or "south."
> > >
> > > I agree, with the addition that "winter in the north" and "summer
> > > the south" would need to be unambiguously placed at the beginning
> > > the end
> > > the year.
> > Jut to be clear, that's not what I'm advocating. My use case is
> > periodical cover dates, and I really just want this as simple as
> > possible:
> > x:coverdate "2000-41"
> > Bruce
> And by consequence the precision of the term is quite coarse. Spring,
> for example, being anywhere (in Europe) from Mid Jan to July, Winter
> from Sept to the end of March, Autumn from Sept to December and Summer
> from May/June to October... all depending upon the semantics of the
> name in context..
> Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB
> Umsatz-St-ID: DE130492967