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  August 2011

DATETIME August 2011

Subject:

Re: August 4 Draft

From:

Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Tue, 9 Aug 2011 15:50:02 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (41 lines)

 From: Edward C. Zimmermann
> But why not "later"? "Never" is not possible since it embodies such
> strong certainty. And if one knows with certainty that it can't ever be
> filled in..

Why does it have to be one or the other, i.e. "will be filled in later" or
"will never be filled in". Why can't it be "might be filled in later"

 
> A "standalone" date such as 2001-1u-u8 ... what do the "u"s here mean..

This is not intended to be allowed - an incomplete part of a date component
- year, month, or day - occupied by u(s) with the rest filled in. I've seen
no use case for that. 


> what does the expression say? A date such as 2001-uu-12 is saying that
> an event took place on the 12th day of a month to be filled in later in
> the year 2001.  

Why can't it say "12th day of an unspecified month which might be filled in
later" 


> In "standalone" dates the expressions 2001-12-uu and 2001-12 are not
> the same. They have different precision and are telling different
> stories..
 
That's fine, I have no problem adding a note about precision to this effect.

> The confusion comes as soon as we let "u" be anything other than a
> placeholder "to be filled in later".. Why a placeholder has been used
> instead of using a digit or a digit and an expression of
> approximateness or uncertainty (using one of our postfix unary
> operators) is beyond the scope of our concerns and does not matter..

I would assert that going beyond "might be filled in later" and expressing
certainty that it will be filled in later is beyond our scope. 

--Ray

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