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  May 2011

DATETIME May 2011

Subject:

Re: Rereading the EDTF specification

From:

"Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 13 May 2011 15:41:19 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (90 lines)

As I said in a note yesterday (I think) I will not have time to process any of this until late next week at best. I will process the messages in order, earlier ones before this one. I suggest that you hold off on any further analysis until I can catch up.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Saašha Metsärantala
> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 2:24 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [DATETIME] Rereading the EDTF specification
> 
> Hello!
> 
> I've re-read the EDTF specification and the BNF.
> 
> In this e-mail, I suggest some small changes or clarifications to the
> specification.
> 
> The BNF need more work and I plan to describe that later (not in this
> e-mail).
> 
> #302
> 
> > uncertain month
> uncertain year and month
> 
> or
> 
> uncertain yearMonth
> 
> to avoid confusions with the following #3021.
> 
> #305
> 
> I suggest to add an hyphen before the month.
> 
> > (2004)?06-11
> (2004)?-06-11
> 
> # 315
> 
> I suggest to remove the single quotes.
> 
> > '156u-12-25'
> 156u-12-25
> 
> #301..#315 section 3 - column for syntax:
> 
> > It could be because the date has not been assigned, or because it is
> > classified,
> It could be because (this part of) the date has not been assigned, or
> because it is unclassified,
> 
> #317 In the column "examples", we read
> 
> > All of the years
> 
> In the column "syntax", we read:
> 
> > "all the years",
> without "of".
> 
> #3171
> 
> > 1956-1958
> 1956..1958
> 
> #325 - I would suggest to clarify how we propose to store that in XML
> attributes
> 
> #Annex
> 
> > Volatile / dynamic dates
> I assume we mean "deictic dates" and, in this case, I would suggest to
> use the word "deictic" for clarity. Otherwise, the reader may wonder
> what kind of "nearly-deicitc" but "non-diectic" thing we mean here.
> 
> #Annex
> 
> The syntax used for the season qualifier in the annex does not match
> the syntax we agreed upon and which is used in #331.
> 
> Miscellaneous thought:
> 
> - The expression "a profile of and an extension to" reminds me of
> "narrowed extended".
> 
> Regards!
> 
> Saašha,

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