W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > July to September 2006

[Bug 3027] erroneous date example

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 01:03:34 +0000
CC:
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1GP7Xq-0004an-SI@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3027





------- Comment #4 from davep@iit.edu  2006-09-18 01:03 -------
(In reply to comment #3)

> > The Note or more explanatory in-line text will be provided.  But in a msg to
> > the Schema WG, Sandy pointed out that nonetheless the equality was not correct.
> >  Correct candidate equalities are either 2000-12-13+13:00=2000-12-12+11:00
> > and 2000-12-12+13:00=2000-12-11+11:00; one or the other will likely be used.
> 
> &%#%&^ typo:  s/+11:00/-11:00/g in this para.

I propose the following rewording of the two bullets:

  A day is a calendar (or "local time") day in each timezone, including the
timezones outside of +12:00 through -11:59 inclusive:

2000-12-12+13:00 < 2000-12-12+11:00  (just as 2000-12-12+12:00 has always been
less than 2000-12-12+11:00, but in version 1.0  2000-12-12+13:00 >
2000-12-12+11:00 , since 2000-12-12+13:00 = 2000-12-12-11:00 because
2000-12-12+13:00's "recoverable timezone" was ?11:00)

  Similarly:

2000-12-12+13:00 = 2000-12-11-11:00  (whereas under 1.0, as just stated, 
2000-12-12+13:00 = 2000-12-12?11:00)

I hope that the explicit statement of the 1.0 inequality in the first bullet
will make the point of the second bullet more obvious.
Received on Monday, 18 September 2006 01:03:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:10 GMT