> > 276 BC – c. 195/194 BC
> *I take this to mean "the interval beginning 276BC and ending
> approximately 195 or 194 BC".*
Yes. Sorry, mistyped "ca." as "c." here.
> *We can't express approximately "195 or 194 BC", but really, that's not
> significantly different from "approximately 195BC" or "approximately
> 194BC", pick one (say the latter).*
Well, true. But for the cataloger making the entry the uncertainty
was significant enough to record in detail.
> *We can express "the interval beginning 276BC and ending approximately
> 194 BC":*
> *(note I have used 275 and 193 instead of 276 and 194 because I assume
> you mean literal "BC" in which there is no year zero. Edtf assumes a
> year zero.)*
Yes, 1 BC (BCE) was before 1 AD (CE).
> *Can't quite represent that. Can represent " July or August 1213 BC" but
> we haven't put in the spec the capability to put that expression in an
> interval. It would be trivially easy to modify the spec to handle that,
> but we would need an expression of a use case for it.*
Going over any large bibliographic database should gain plenty of
examples. bibmarc 100.d and 260.c, for example.
> > early 3rd century BC
> *I don't believe we can represent this. Ed Zimmerman might have
> something to say, because he suggests that we can represent "mid-18th
> century" (though I'm not quite sure how).*
early, late, middle; I assume both century and decade.
Now I also remember seeing somewhere (the German authority records,
maybe) notations like 1st..4th quarter of a century.
> > fl. 780-770
> > fl. around 1180
> *Sorry, I don't know what "fl." Means in this context. *
"flourished", e.g. we know of works by this author, or some other
events, between these dates. (Similarly, sometimes the MARC fields
have "b." and "d." for born and died, and naturally for other languages
other abbreviations are used...)