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

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

From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:38:45 +0000
Message-Id: <8DD7AFA9-0D28-4F23-8433-BD4B10E2E299@jenitennison.com>
To: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Hi,

I think it will be confusing for users if the method of processing the @datetime attribute in HTML5+RDFa 1.1 is different from that used in HTML5.

For example, it's perfectly legal in HTML5 to have a <time> element such as:

  <time datetime="20:00">8pm</time>

The value of @datetime here is not a legal xs:time (which must have a seconds component), but the HTML5 algorithm [1] will recognise it as if it had been specified as 20:00:00. I think HTML5+RDFa 1.1 should do the same; if you wanted to be more stringent in the interpretation of a @datetime attribute in XML, fine -- they are likely to use the normal XML Schema syntax.

The second thing to note is that HTML5 will also interpret the content of the <time> element as a date/time value. So if you have:

  <time>20:00</time>

that will also be recognised in HTML5 as indicating the time 20:00:00 [2]. It would be great if HTML5+RDFa 1.1 didn't insist on a @datetime attribute in these circumstances.

Cheers,

Jeni

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/common-microsyntaxes.html#valid-date-string-with-optional-time
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/text-level-semantics.html#attr-time-datetime
-- 
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 17:39:08 GMT

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