El 08/06/2012 19:33, Ethan Gruber escribió: > Hi Holly, > > BC dates can be represented as negative numbers according to ISO > 8601. The text node of unitdate can have anything in it, so your last > example is what I would recommend doing (2000-2010 is misleading when > you actually mean 2000 BC). The era attribute is probably > unnecessary. Keep in mind that years have to be four digits, so 300 > BC needs to be -0300 in the @normal. > > Ethan > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Holly Deakyne <[log in to unmask] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > > My date range is from 2000BCE-2010CE. I'm using a form to create the > XML, but this form does not support BCE dates so it has to be edited > by hand. > > > This is what the XML looks like now: > > <unitdate type="inclusive" label="Dates:" encodinganalog="245$f" > normal="2000/2010" era="ce" calendar="gregorian">2000-2010</unitdate> > > > > Would I do this? > > <unitdate type="inclusive" label="Dates:" encodinganalog="245$f" > normal="2000/2010" era="bce/ce" > calendar="gregorian">2000-2010</unitdate> > > > Or also add a negative: > > <unitdate type="inclusive" label="Dates:" encodinganalog="245$f" > normal="-2000/2010" era="bce/ce" > calendar="gregorian">2000-2010</unitdate> > > > Could I add to the text: > > <unitdate type="inclusive" label="Dates:" encodinganalog="245$f" > normal="-2000/2010" era="bce/ce" calendar="gregorian">2000 BCE-2010 > CE</unitdate> > > > > > Mostly I think the era is wrong. How would I state this? Break it up > into two somehow? > > > thank you, > Holly Deakyne > >