- From: by way of <staschuk@telusplanet.net>
- Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:28:53 -0700
- 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 UTC