- From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:37:52 +0100
- To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Cc: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
2011/11/11 Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>: > Niklas, > > On 11 Nov 2011, at 15:55, Niklas Lindström wrote: >> I also think we should consider whether xsd:gYear, xsd:gYearMonth and >> xsd:gMonthDay can be captured as well (since years less than 1000 must >> be padded with leading zeros [1]). Of course, xsd:gMonth and xsd:gDay >> are too ambiguous, as today's date so amply indicates. ;) > > > xsd:gMonth and xsd:gDay aren't ambiguous. Months have the format --MM, so November is "--11" whereas days have the format ---DD so the 11th day of each month is "---11". I should have checked those too of course. I stand corrected. :) > As I said in the mail I just sent, I don't know which subset of formats will be supported by the new <time> element. Yes, I agree (also with Ivan). The <time> spec should define what is to be supported. Best regards, Niklas > Jeni > -- > Jeni Tennison > http://www.jenitennison.com > >
Received on Friday, 11 November 2011 16:38:44 UTC