W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Action 695 argument

From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 09:12:12 +0000
Message-ID: <499144EC.3090100@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>
CC: Changhai Ke <cke@ilog.fr>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

Gary Hallmark wrote:
> Dave Reynolds wrote:
>> So it sounds like you might need to propose that RIF adds xsd:date and 
>> xsd:time (with and without timezone).
> according to DTB, RIF already has xsd:date and xsd:time.

Whoops, sorry, I had missed that, my fault for not checking.

> why does xml schema add xsd:datetimestamp, but not add xsd:datestamp and 
> xsd:timestamp that makes the timezone mandatory for dates and times as 
> well as datetimes?

Well since dates and times without timezones make more sense than 
datetimes perhaps they don't feel it adds value. Or perhaps they only 
added xsd:datetimestamp because of OWL 2 and OWL 2 doesn't support date 
or time and so wouldn't care what XSD did about those :-)

Hewlett-Packard Limited
Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Tuesday, 10 February 2009 09:13:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:54 UTC