I would also assume that we need only represent a year (and even then often only an approximation) and not month and day, or time.

 

Proposal:

 

1. change the profile so that all years based on ISO 8601 syntax are four digits.

 

2. Introduce the following syntax.  Note that we already use the character E to signal certain "extensions".  Use EY to signal that a year follows, and the syntax is

      

            EY[year]

 

where [year] may be (a) a plain (or signed) integer, e.g. 100001; or (b) an integer in scientific notation e.g. 17*10^9

 

Comments please.

 

--Ray

 

 

 

From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Simon Grant
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 10:22 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [DATETIME] Expanded years

 

Seems like a good idea to me, too, particularly as beyond the 4-digit range, we are talking about scientific estimates of dates, not dates derived from any kind of written records.

Simon

On 11 January 2011 15:07, Edward C. Zimmermann <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Yes! (the philosophical justification is analogous to the scientific use case)

On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 10:00:44 -0500, Ray Denenberg wrote

> From: Edward C. Zimmermann
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 7:02 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [DATETIME] Expanded years
> >
> > The best solution would be to use a scientific notation.
>
> Are you suggesting that we use standard ISO 8601 four-digit notation
> for four-digit years, and invent a syntax (perhaps based on
> scientific notation) to represent larger years?  Just trying to get
> clarification on your suggestion, I like the idea.
>
> --Ray

--

Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB
Basis Systeme netzwerk, Munich Ges. des buergerl. Rechts
http://www.nonmonotonic.net
Umsatz-St-ID: DE130492967




--
Simon Grant
+44 7710031657
http://www.simongrant.org/home.html