W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > February 2011

[Bug 12021] Is <time>2011</time> acceptable? The formulation "precisedate" suggests that it is not, but an example says that "the year is not marked up at all, since marking it up would not be particularly useful", implying (IMHO) that it would be _possible_ to use <

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 16:15:54 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1PnChu-0007dJ-Am@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12021

Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jackalmage@gmail.com

--- Comment #1 from Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> 2011-02-09 16:15:53 UTC ---
No, the <time> element either represents a date (year-month-day) or a time or a
datetime.

The language in that example is misleading, though - it does indeed suggest
that it would be *possible* to only mark up the year.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2011 16:15:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 February 2011 16:16:00 GMT