Thanks, Ray.

To elaborate a little, what got me thinking about this was the proposed use
of the doubled "//" which presumably (I haven't checked) is not specified by
ISO 8601. Thus, as it looks to me, the proposal to have intervals beginning
and/or ending with intervals (good idea, by the way, as a way of
representing earliest/latest starting/ending time) *already* breaks ISO

Thus my suggestion would be to have a number of dots as an alternative to
ISO's "/", and NOT to use "//" at all, which would allow keeping the ISO
8601 single "/" for the middle of interval-bounded intervals in cases where
an alternate formulation (e.g. a number of dots) was used for the terminal
interval. (Sorry if this is a little difficult to follow: I hope not too
much so.)


On 8 November 2010 15:05, Denenberg, Ray <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>  *From:* Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Simon Grant
> *Sent:* Saturday, November 06, 2010 8:13 AM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [DATETIME] Extended Date/Time Format DRAFT specification
> for review through December 6
> *"2. the interval signs, "/" and "//"
> Perhaps others would join with me in regretting that ISO ever chose "/" for
> interval, as it conflicts with common usage as in today 6/11/10 or 11/6/10
> depending on which side of the Atlantic you are. Apologies if this has been
> discussed to death already, but using a number of dots is common usage for a
> range. One possible convention that I can imagine is to have any sequence of
> more than one (say two) "." indicating an interval, and if an interval
> between intervals is needed, as with "//", one could have say 4 dots for the
> major break. But maybe others have better ideas about how many dots to use."
> *
> * *
> Well I join you  in regretting that ISO chose "/".   However, If we were to
> adopt a sequence of dots, or for that matter any convention other than "/",
> it would mean abandoning the premise of this work, that any feature
> prescribed, if it is a feature supported by ISO 8601,  will be prescribed in
> a manner compatible with ISO 8601.   My position on that is that there would
> need to be overwhelming sentiment to do that.
> In any case, this is open to discussion.
> --Ray

Simon Grant
+44 7710031657