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  July 2011

DATETIME July 2011

Subject:

Re: interval precision

From:

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

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:31:26 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (64 lines)

We should avoid over-engineering. There is no need for a syntactic construct to indicate precision.

The precision of an interval is really not a concept that needs articulation. If you have the interval:

    1960/9164-04

Then the start endpoint and end endpoint have their own precisions - year and month precision respectively. These need not be the same, and the precision of the interval is simply undefined.

--Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Saašha Metsärantala
> Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 4:00 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [DATETIME] interval precision
>
> Hello!
>
> > > > the points in an interval are determined by its precision.
> > > When its precision is expressed, yes!
> > When is it not expressed?
> It is not unambiguously expressed in an expression like
>
> 1905/1916-03
>
> Now, I will try to formulate a suggestion for a syntactic construct to
> disambiguate precision. The letter "P" is already used in the EDTF
> specification. Therefore, I will tentatively choose the letter "G" for
> granularity. Of course, we could rename it to something else. Here is
> my tentative syntactic suggestion:
>
> 1905/1916-03 \G1M
>
> disambiguates the granularity of the interval to "one month". We can
> also easily fine tune the granularity, such as:
>
> 1905/1916-03 \G3D
>
> for three days. Maybe, this could be useful in (for example):
>
> 1905 \G1D
>
> and mean "one 24-hour long period in 1905" (not necessarily one day
> from 00:00:00 to 24:00:00), whereas
>
> 1905-uu-uu
>
> means "one day (from 00:00:00 to 24:00:00) in 1905".
>
> This was only a tentative suggestion, but it could help us to put
> granularity within a \G construct and focus on "points in time", "start
> points" and "end points" when we write the rest of the EDTF
> specification.
> Thus, we would let the \G construct take care of granularity. We could
> call that a kind of "modularization".
>
> The expression following \G could follow the same syntax and c14n as
> the one following the /P construct.
>
> 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