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  September 2012

DATETIME September 2012

Subject:

Re: Minor comments on Draft Submission 13 January 2012

From:

Rintze Zelle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Mon, 10 Sep 2012 17:31:16 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (67 lines)

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>  >> "For year-month, month may instead be "season" (i.e. 21, 22, 23, or
>> >> 24)
>> however, in that case the entire year-season combination is qualified;
>> neither may be qualified individually."
>> Does this mean that in the example "2011-23~", year and season are
>> approximate? The current explanation, "Approximate season (Autumn 2011)",
>> suggests that only the season is approximate.
>
> The intent is that a season never stands alone, thus by "season" we mean a
> year-season combination.  For example, "spring", the season, has no meaning
> in isolation (in the context of this spec). So the expression "Approximate
> season" implicitly means "Approximate year-season combination".

My question is about whether "2011-23~" means:

certain year, approximate season

or

approximate year, approximate season

The description "Approximate season (Autumn 2011)" suggests the
former, but the text "the entire year-season combination is qualified;
neither may be qualified individually" suggests the latter.

>> >> "Seasons may be sorted with Spring < Summer < Autumn < Winter. Thus
>> "2011-21" should sort before "2011-23", but applications may choose to
> sort
>> "2011-21" and "2011-10" either way"
>> I find the use of both "may" and "should" confusing. Which one is it?
>
> As it says in section 2, these are defined in RFC 2119
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt

Yes, and according to that document, "may" means "truly optional", and
"should" is much more strict. With this in mind, "Seasons may be
sorted with Spring < Summer < Autumn < Winter." seems to conflict with
"Thus '2011-21' should sort before '2011-23'".

Would the following do? (if you want to keep the first "may", then the
"should" and "but" are out of place)

Seasons should sort as Spring < Summer < Autumn < Winter (e.g.,
"2011-21" should sort before "2011-23"), but applications may choose
to sort "2011-21" and "2011-10" either way, or consider months and
seasons incomparable.

>> Also, reading the whole spec it is unclear to me whether time strings can
>> be used with any type of date (e.g. uncertain/approximate/unspecific
> dates,
>> or dates with only year or month precision). The BNF allows time strings
>> after any date string.
>
> No (I don't think so). "date" is defined in level 0.  It does not include
> uncertain, etc. Those things are defined only in levels 1 and 2.
>
> "dateAndTime" is also defined in level 0.  But "dateAndTime" is never
> referenced in levels 1 and 2.

I might have misread the BNF, then.

Best,

Rintze

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