Print

Print


On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Edward C. Zimmermann <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 08:57:46 -0700, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen wrote
>> On Jan 19, 2011, at 2:47 AM, Edward C. Zimmermann wrote:
>>
>> > Tossing a wacky idea into the ring...
>> > Why not read the semantics for T as time since 0..
>> > 2011-01-17 is day precision
>> > 2011-01-17T01   is hour precision and means 1 AM
>> > 2011-01-17T01:02 is minute precision and means 1:02 AM
>> > This all agreed..  with this reading of T we get the T:24:00 and
>> > T12:60 paradigm extended to arbitary hours, minutes..
>> > 2011-01-17T25   would be hour precision and 1 AM on the 18th
>> > basically I am thinking of allowing for simple math... this could
>> > be interesting for dumb clients.
>>
>> It depends, I guess, on whether you are seeking to
>> define a format for user input or for interchange among
>
> I see the goal as both.

For the record, I don't; I think the former should be out of scope. If
we try to do too much, we will certainly fail.

This goes back to the issue of requirements; I think we really need a
better understanding of what is and what is not in scope for this
effort.

Bruce

>> parties.  It's often quite useful to accept a lot of forms
>> in user input that one does not want in a database or
>> document to be stored and interchanged.
> Yes.
>
>>
>> Users may well type "19.01.2011" or "1/19/2011" or
>
> 1/19/2011 is one such.. clearly here well defined but
> what is 9/11/2001 ? 11 Sept or 8 Nov? And what about
> 10/03/15--- which can be read as 15 March 2010 or ..
>
> We are now talking about parsers and applications and
> in my own class I have included a large number of formats
> and even included the possibility to allow for inputs such
> as these globally ambiguous but locally understood
> formats.. These are part of their own standards.. I might
> not like them but they exist. What we are wprking on here
> is a new "standard" intended to enable some forms of
> expressions that are desired but not...
>
>> "18 Jan 2011" or "on the 19th of this month", all meaning
>> the same thing.  But in metadata (as opposed to the
>> transcription of historical or legal documents), is there
>> an important goal to be achieved by preserving the differences
>> among those forms, given that (by hypothesis) they all
>> mean the same thing?
>
> There are some differences.. we are talking in this
> list about non-volatile dates but volatile dates such
> as today, the 19th of the current month, 2 years ago
> etc. are in my applications of great utility...
>
>
>>
>> --
>> ****************************************************************
>> * C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, Black Mesa Technologies LLC
>> * http://www.blackmesatech.com
>> * http://cmsmcq.com/mib
>> * http://balisage.net
>> ****************************************************************
>
>
> --
>
> Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB
> http://www.nonmonotonic.net
> Umsatz-St-ID: DE130492967
>