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

Re: Action 695 argument

From: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:10:22 -0800
Message-ID: <499257640902111110yefc0e71g471f0a66fbe576a9@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: Changhai Ke <cke@ilog.fr>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 3:59 AM, Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:

> Gary Hallmark wrote:
>
>    * How do I reference the current datetime (e.g. fn:current-dateTime
>>     <#func-current-dateTime>)
>>
>
> Separate from the semantic problems for BLD that Jos correctly points out,

I still don't see any semantic problems.  Isn't a current-date builtin
equivalent to a current-date constant and an equality formula like
rif:current-date = "2009-02-11T12:30+02:00"


> would fn:current-dateTime return an xsd:dateTime with or without a
> timestamp?


from the xpath spec:
fn:current-dateTime() as xs:dateTime
Summary: Returns the current dateTime (with timezone) from the dynamic
context.

>
>
> To meet Changhai's use cases it would have to be without a timestamp while
> for many reasonable usecases it would have to be with one.

Not if we include the adjust timezone builtins.  These let you convert
timezones, including to/from no timezone.

>
>
> I assume that if you add something like this to PRD you'll need both
> fn:current-dateTime and fn:current-dateTimeStamp.

I would wait and see if xml schema adds it.

>
>
> Dave
> --
> Hewlett-Packard Limited
> Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
> Registered No: 690597 England
>
>


-- 
Cheers,

Gary Hallmark
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2009 19:10:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:03 GMT