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  July 2011

DATETIME July 2011

Subject:

Re: interval precision

From:

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

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:42:03 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (52 lines)

On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:59:58 +0200, [UTF-8?]SaaÅ¡ha Metsärantala wrote
> Hello!
> 
> > Again.. we are back to p-r-e-c-i-s-i-o-n... ! :)
> Precision and reliability seem to have been carefully disregarded by (most 
> of) earlier specifications. An assumption of total precision makes things

Precision (readability and repeatability) is something quite different from 
reliability (certainty, belief, trust). Its yard-stricks versus data 
quality. Measures of reliabiliy are, of course, built upon models of 
precision but are also fundamentaly qualatative rather than quantative.
 
> easier. But it is probably just there, work need to be done.


> 
> Our discussions may seem lengthy, but this comes as no surprise. It is a 
> difficult issue. Let's work a little bit more with that: It seems that we 
> will soon reach some good way to formulate a really useful EDTF 
> specification.
> 
> > the data elements definition would dictate which interpretation applies.
> For interoperability reasons, I would really like to limit the number of 
> interpretations for each syntactic construct. I do NOT mean that we should 
> not be aware of the different possible interpretations! Let's instead 
> augment the number of syntactic constructs whenever there is a need for 
> that and document their semantics in great detail.
> 
> If there are three ways to interpret an interval, then let's describe 
> three different syntactic constructs and their semantics. 
> Over-simplification seldom solves complexity problems.
> 

No. There are not multiple ways to interpret an interval. We are, I think, 
all quite clear what closed intervals are: a continuum of points between two 
discrete (end)points. Where these have room is in their application. This, 
however, is the same for dates (irrespective of precision). This is beyond 
the scope of our work but something for those developing the dataset 
profiles using our work. 


> Regards!
> 
> [UTF-8?]Saašha,


--

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