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: <5.1.0.14.1.20021224112823.02a1a2a0@localhost>
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.
	                                    [section 3.2.6.1]

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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:01 GMT