W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2000

Re: LC-1 specify date/time validity better

From: Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 10:25:57 +0100
Message-ID: <008701c03128$3bbf0080$06cc66c3@sgml>
To: "Paul Cotton" <pcotton@microsoft.com>, "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>
Cc: "W3C XML Schema Comments list" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Michael

Thanks for your message on this. Unfortunately I don't think they are quite there yet, particularly in all the cases where you have added the following:

'Canonical representation
The canonical representation for recurringDate is defined by prohibiting certain options from the Lexical representation (3.3.28.1). Specifically, the preceding optional "+" sign is prohibited and the time zone must be Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) and be indicated by a "Z". '

In no case is there a Z in the accompanying example, though the sentence specifies that the letter "must ... be indicated by a Z". 

Either the text is still misleading or the examples are incorrect. (Personally I suspect the text as the Z just does not apply naturally to something like recurringDay, recurringDate, year or century.) 

NB: Sometimes one needs care when simply copying text from a master definition to a derived one. (Pity not all basic types have list of derived types associated with them to aid cross checking.)

Martin Bryan
Chair, CEN/ISSS working group in Defining and Managing Semantics and Datatypes
Received on Sunday, 8 October 2000 09:02:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:48 GMT