W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Looking at the time element (again) (ISSUE-97)

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:11:55 +0100
Cc: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <AAA7AE4D-ECCF-4D63-860A-DC1632DF275D@w3.org>
To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>

On Nov 10, 2011, at 14:03 , Shane McCarron wrote:

> I see that you suggest using 'zero hour' when there is no time component.  As long as we use GMT for the timezone I think that is okay.  However, note that some timezones on some days HAVE NO zero hour.  When adjusting for daylight savings time, for example, Cairo goes from 23:59:59 to 01:00:00.  As you say - nothing with dates and times is easy.
> 

Indeed...:-)

Ivan


> On 11/10/2011 6:50 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> Now that<time>  seems to be back into the picture, I have looked at ISSUE-97 again[1].
>> 
>> The issue, as raised by Stéphane, proposes to understand the '@datetime' property of the<time>  element. Essentially, if the source contains this:
>> 
>> <time property="something" datetime="2009-05-10">May 10th 2009</time>
>> 
>> we should, implicitly, consider this as being
>> 
>> <time property="something" datetime="2009-05-10" content="2009-05-10">May 10th 2009</time>
>> 
>> and then let the core RDFa processing go. That is of course easy.
>> 
>> However... do we want to add a datatype to this? One would think so, but then we get to a very slippery slope. Which datatype? Looking at
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#date
>> 
>> we do have quite a lot of possibilities... There is of course xsd:dateTime (this is what Stéphane used in his original mail for the issue). This would mean the transformation of the<time>  element into:
>> 
>> <time property="something" datetime="2009-05-10" content="2009-05-10T00:00:00-00:00" datatype="xsd:dateTime">May 10th 2009</time>
>> 
>> but there are a bunch of others, like gYear, gYearMonth, etc.
>> 
>> Personally, I would propose to use xsd:dateTime only. But that has to be decided by the group.
>> 
>> However, nothing with time is simple... If the author puts in the whole ISO format, then are of course fine. But I would expect that in the vast majority of cases the hour and minute and the others will all be missing. Is it all right to just add the 0 hour, as Stéphane did it? Again, I can live with that, but this is something to be decided and known for interoperability reasons...
>> 
>> Minor things, but should be cast in stone:-)
>> 
>> Ivan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/97
>> 
>> ----
>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>> mobile: +31-641044153
>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Shane McCarron
> Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
> +1 763 786 8160 x120
> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 13:09:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:18 GMT