Print

Print


It seems there is a discrepancy about whether it is legal in 8601 for the
endpoints (start and end) of an interval to be other than "complete
representation". For example year/year , year-month/year-month, even
year-month-day/year-month-day would be less that complete representation
because the time is not included. Complete represention has to be
year-month-day-time/year-month-day-time.

By a literal interpretation of 8601 this seems to be true, Ed conjectures
that it is an unintentional oversight. I don't think it matters much as I'm
sure we all agree that there is no reason to disallow these "incomplete
representations" in our spec.

I suggest that we designate these as level 1 features.  That is, they are
not part of the formal 8601 profile (level 0) but rather part of the first
level extensions. 

--Ray



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Edward C. Zimmermann
> Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 2:44 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [DATETIME] A three level suggestion // ISO 8601
> Hermeneutics
> 
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 12:44:13 -0400, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
> wrote
> > From: Edward C. Zimmermann
> > > I only have a copy of the 2000 draft.. but..
> > >
> > > 5.2.1.3 defines these truncated dates.
> > > 5.5.1 gives pattern a) as an interval: start/end where start and
> end
> > > are dates.
> >
> > Ed - It appears to me that ISO 8601-2004 (the current version) is
> > freely available, since it is easily googled, for example:
> >
> > http://dotat.at/tmp/ISO_8601-2004_E.pdf
> 
> In that version
> 
> 4.4.1 here specifies start and send with / as a).
> 
> In the verbage of 4.4.4.1 it asks for expressions compliant to 4.3.2
> Again, I think, this was an unintentional logical oversight in the text.
> 4.2.2.3 defines the representations with reduced acuracy. There is no
> reason, I think, to disallow these. Note that they explicitly allow for
> reduced representations for durations so I don't see why they would.....
> 
> >
> > And my printed copy seems to be the same as this version.  It doesn't
> > have any of the sections you cite; there is a section 5 but it is a
> > half-page with no subsections.  Could you have a look at the newer
> one
> > and determine if what you saw in the older version is there?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --Ray
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB
> http://www.nonmonotonic.net
> Umsatz-St-ID: DE130492967