Re: An approach to xsd:dateTime

On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 12:27 +0100, Uli Sattler wrote:

> the 'easy' support for time that I was advocating yesterday seems to  
> fit in nicely with this:
> 
> - absence of a time zone (so I guess we would only support a  
> *restriction* of xsd:dateTime, but this should be ok)

I think we either need all constants to have a timezone, or none.  I
prefer the first based on the assumption that more data "in the wild"
has timezones, and that such data is more completely defined.

> - the value space is continuous (since seconds are decimals between 0  
> and 60, according to my reading of Mike's [1]) and therefor, from an  
> algorithms perspective, isomorphic to owl:number and thus it shouldn't  
> be too much of a burden on the implementors.

Agreed.

-- 
Mike Smith

Clark & Parsia