W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2001

Order relation of gMonth type

From: Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI <kohsuke.kawaguchi@eng.sun.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:03:59 -0800
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <20010319154041.6A60.KOHSUKE.KAWAGUCHI@eng.sun.com>

Dear XML Schema WG members,

First of all, congratulation for PR!

> This means that the specification is stable and that implementation
> experience has been gathered showing that each feature of the
> specification can be implemented. 

By the way, please tell me the name of the program that thoroughly
implemented part 2 of the spec. As far as I know, there is no reference

I found a problem(?) in order-relation of gMonth type.

Let us compare two instances of gMonth type.

(P)  --02--Z            (March without time zone)
(Q)  --03---08:00       (March in Pacific Standard Time)

According to the spec (section,

(A) normalize P and Q.

   P is already normalized.
   Q has to be normalized, and that's where the problem happens.

According to the spec, addition must be done as defined in Appendix E of
the spec.

However, in appendix E is the following description.

> If a field in S is not specified, it is treated in the calculation as if
> it were the minimum allowed value in that field, however, after the
> calculation is concluded, the corresponding field in E is removed (set
> to unspecified). 

Because of this, this result has to be "--02--Z", although the intermediate
result of this addition is "28th,Feb 16:00:00Z".

The net result is, P==Q.

My question is, is this the intention of Schema WG?
It seems to me that this result is unintuitive, to say the least.

E-Mail: k-kawa@bigfoot.com
Received on Monday, 19 March 2001 19:03:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:54 UTC