W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > May 2008

xsd:date or xsd:#date?

From: Micah Dubinko <mdubinko@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 10:09:56 -0700
Message-ID: <4819F964.60100@yahoo-inc.com>
To: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
CC: Peter Mika <pmika@yahoo-inc.com>

Here is an example from the latest editors' draft 
<http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-rdfa-syntax-20080501/>

In it, I see what seems to be 2 minor errors, and one possibly larger one.

<html
  xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
  xmlns:cal="http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical#"
  xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
  >
  <head><title>Jo's Friends and Family Blog</title></head>
  <body>
    <p>
      I'm holding
      <span property="cal:summary">
        one last summer Barbecue
      </span>,
      on
      <span property="cal:dtstart" content="20070916T1600-0500"
            datatype="xsd:datetime">
        September 16th at 4pm
      </span>.
    </p>
  </body>
</html>


Minor: The datatype should be called xsd:dateTime (capital T)
Minor: The value should be "2007-09-16T16:00-05:00", not 
"20070916T1600-0500"
(ISO8601 seems to allow skipping the delimiters, but XML Schema doesn't)

Here's the possibly significant error:

1. The properly declared namespace for XML Schema is 
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"

2. The value of the datatype CURIE on line 15 is xsd:dateTime

3. Applying the CURIE algorithm--simple concatenation--yields 
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchemadateTime
--Which is not recognized as a XML Schema datatype! There's no source 
for the intervening # character to originate from.

Is it necessary to write xsd:#dateTime? Or is the XML Schema (and 
possibly other?) namespces grandfathered in somehow?

In Section 2 you define the xsd namespace differently (and not per XML 
Schema spec, AFAICT)
xsd: http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#

Apologies if this has been mentioned or discussed before, but as far as 
I can see, this looks like an error in the specification. We noticed 
this during implementation. Other parts of the specification have 
similar markup, this one example is just to keep the discussion crisp.

Thanks for looking,

.micah
Received on Thursday, 1 May 2008 17:11:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 1 May 2008 17:11:28 GMT