Print

Print


I haven't heard any comments about this suggestion below.

Essentially this defines the union of the 2 date types under each element
where it applies, i.e. date as YYYY and date+time. So the downside to it
is that they need to be explicitly expressed locally, at every place they
apply rather than referenced. Since at the moment they only occur 2 places
(eventDateTime in Event.xsd and dateCreatedByApplication in Object.xsd)
this doesn't seem to be a huge issue.

Another alternative (in addition to others already mentioned) is to put it
in the PREMIS schema, which will allow it to be used in any of the other
4, but if you use one of the other 4 without the container schema you
would have to import it and then use the appropriate namespaces and
prefixes. 

I would propose that for now, since it only occurs in 2 places, that we do
as below and leave open the more complex option of defining it in the
PREMIS schema (or making a separate schema for dates as Jerry earlier
suggested) for a later version.

Rebecca

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote:

> I think the simplest solution is:
> 
> Change this:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> <xs:element name="eventDateTime" type="dateType" />
> .........
> <xs:simpleType name="dateType">
>   <xs:union memberTypes="xs:date xs:dateTime" />
>   </xs:simpleType>
> ............................................................................
> ..............................
> 
> to This:
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> <xs:element name="eventDateTime">
> <xs:simpleType>
>   <xs:union memberTypes="xs:date xs:dateTime" />
>   </xs:simpleType>
> </xs:element>
> ............................................................................
> .............................
> 
> And correspondingly for the other occurence.
> 
> --Ray
>