W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2002

Canonical lexical representation of duration, redux

From: by way of <staschuk@telusplanet.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:28:53 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: W3C XML Schema Comments list <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>

On 2002-11-03, John Mercado asked what the canonical lexical
representation of duration is; Malhotra replied that there is no
need to specify it, since there is only one lexical representation
per value.  This reply seems to contradict the recommendation:

	If the number of years, months, days, hours, minutes,
	or seconds in any expression equals zero, the number
	and its corresponding designator may be omitted.

Thus, for example, "P1Y" and "P1Y0M" are alternative lexical
representations for the same value.  Furthermore, according to
erratum E2-23, leading zeroes are permitted in each field, making
"P01Y" a third alternative.

Mercado's question is pertinent.

Steven Taschuk           | Receive them ignorant;
staschuk@telusplanet.net | dispatch them confused.
                          |   (Weschler's Teaching Motto) 
Received on Tuesday, 24 December 2002 14:15:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:50:00 UTC