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

RE: Lexical representation of gMonth

From: Ashok Malhotra <ashokma@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 14:48:34 -0700
Message-ID: <E5B814702B65CB4DA51644580E4853FB90731B@red-msg-12.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <zongaro@ca.ibm.com>, <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>, <w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org>
Cc: <lmartin@ca.ibm.com>
Something for the errata?

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: zongaro@ca.ibm.com 
	Sent: Thu 8/9/2001 1:36 PM 
	To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org 
	Subject: Lexical representation of gMonth

	     I don't know whether this has been discussed before, but I
was just noticing what appears to be a discrepancy between the lexical
representation of gMonth in the "XML Schema:  Datatypes" recommendation
[1] and the truncated representation of a month described in of
ISO 8601:1988.  The former indicates that the lexical representation is
"--MM--", while the latter specifies the truncated representation as
	     The rule applied by ISO8601 seems (roughly) to be "omit
fields on the right along with their separators; replace fields on the
left with hyphens, and keep the separators." 
	     Was this difference intended?  If so, why wasn't the same
thing done for gYear or gYearMonth?  They are represented in the
Datatypes recommendation as "CCYY" and "CCYY-MM", respectively (just as
in ISO 8601).  It seems that "CCYY----" and "CCYY-MM--" would have been
more consistent with the representation for gMonth. 
	     Sorry if I'm missing either some history or the
descriptions are different in ISO 8601:2000. 
	[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-2-20010502/#gMonth
	Henry Zongaro      XML Parsers development
	IBM SWS Toronto Lab   Tie Line 778-6044;  Phone (416) 448-6044
Received on Thursday, 9 August 2001 17:50:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:57 UTC