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  May 2012

DATETIME May 2012

Subject:

Re: Official datatype URI for EDTF

From:

Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 18 May 2012 15:54:29 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (50 lines)

Hi Jacob - thanks for the suggestion. This is a preliminary and as yet unofficial response, though we should be able to finalize this fairly soon. We will likely define

    http://id.loc.gov/datatypes#EDTF

as the datatype URI for EDTF, and possibly
 
   http://id.loc.gov/datatypes#EDTF-level0

as a subclass, representing level 0. And we plan to write an XML schema for level 0, underlying the latter URI. For the present there won't be an underlying formal defintion for the first URI, or for levels 1 and 2; we will discuss this further next week.

--Ray




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jakob Voss
> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 4:00 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [DATETIME] Official datatype URI for EDTF
>
> Hi,
>
> The current specification does not mention any relation between RDF and its
> use in RDF and XML. Could you please simply add an official datatype URI? In
> detail, the specification should define three official URIs to refer to each
> of level 0, level 1, and level 2. That's all. People interested in expressing
> EDTF in RDF and XML can then express relations to XML Schema datatypes such as
> xs:time, xs:date, and xs:dateTime, but first URIs are needed to point to the
> specification. It is much easier to handle data with a given URI than having
> to guess whether EDTF was meant to be used or whether someone just created
> date values that happen to look like EDTF syntax.
>
> Thanks,
> Jakob
>
> P.S: URIs are mentioned in Annex A as possible method to refer to "reliability
> levels". This is independent from having URIs for the existing EDTF levels.
>
>
> --
> Verbundzentrale des GBV (VZG)
> Digitale Bibliothek - Jakob Voß
> Platz der Goettinger Sieben 1
> 37073 Goettingen - Germany
> +49 (0)551 39-10242
> http://www.gbv.de
> [log in to unmask]

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