LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for DATETIME Archives


DATETIME Archives

DATETIME Archives


[email protected]


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  February 2011

DATETIME February 2011

Subject:

Re: "--" as an alternate interval separator

From:

"Edward C. Zimmermann" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Mon, 14 Feb 2011 19:50:22 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (40 lines)

For the record I am quite happy with slash (/). It is what ISO 8601 agreed 
upon and what I have implemented. I don't see the point of double 
hyphen/dash (-) but could accept it (as some other features) against good 
judgement. I also see no problems with braces, parenthesis, brackets etc. as
they too as easy enough and quick enought to parse and less prone notational 
ambiguity (expressions meansing something other than what was intended). I 
also see support of MARC dates as IMPORTANT. I see our aims are to develop a 
superset of ISO 8601 rather than a new soup. People, of course, would be 
free to profile their applications and projects to adhere to some style 
guide..

On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 10:55:14 -0500, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote
> From: Syd Bauman
> > Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 4:15 PM
> > Subject: Re: [DATETIME] square bracket
> 
> > [1] Like using "--" as an alternate interval separator, which on the
> >     face of it seems just plain foolish.
> 
> Earlier in the discussion (a few months ago) there was objection raised to,
> and apparent popular sentiment against, usage of the slash character for an
> interval.  But it really isn't appropriate to profile out the slash in 
favor
> of another syntax because slash is what is used by ISO 8601. As a
> compromise, the alternative "--" is allowed as an alternative, so both 
forms
> may be used. Everyone seemed happy with this compromise at the time.
> 
> I agree that this leaves the spec vulnerable to criticism but the strong
> sentiment against the slash seems to leave no alternative.
> 
> --Ray


--

Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB
http://www.nonmonotonic.net
Umsatz-St-ID: DE130492967

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

March 2022
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