Print

Print


On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Saašha Metsärantala <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I wonder what you think about the following suggestion.
>
> Keeping in mind that EDTF is thought of as
>
> "both a profile of and extension to ISO 8601"
>
> according to
>
> http://www.loc.gov/standards/datetime/spec.html
>
> we could skip "reinventing the wheel", define the first EDTF level as a
> profile of ISO 8601 and just add some constraints on ISO 8601 to build the
> first level of EDTF. This could make both the BNF and the coming regexes
> easier to write, just carving away what we do not want have.
>
> Thereafter, we could have a second level thought of as an extension of the
> first level. Thus, we could use the BNF just to add features to the first
> level. I'm particularly thinking of lists, "x", longYears, seasons and
> temporal expressions. There would not be any "uncertain, approximate,
> unspecified" here. Well, ... "temporal expressions" and seasons may contain
> a kind of approximation, but I suggest to place them in the second level
> anyway.

- where would intervals go?
- not clear why 'x' is here and not below?

Bruce

> Thereafter, we could have a third level thought of as an extension of the
> second level. Thus, we could use the BNF just to add features to the second
> level. I'm particularly thinking of "?", "~" and "u". There we would
> introduce "uncertain, approximate, unspecified".
>
> Comments are welcome!
>
> Regards!
>
> Saašha,
>