W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2009

[Bug 3027] erroneous date example

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:30:37 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1N53Xx-0002U3-Pe@wiggum.w3.org>

--- Comment #13 from Kevin Braun <kbraun@obj-sys.com>  2009-11-02 20:30:37 ---
Regarding the part that reads "others, such as '23:00:00-03:00' and
'02:00:00Z', now denote unequal values": it is not clear to me that these would
have been considered equal under 1.0.  I say this because XML Schema 1.0, Part
2, section 3.2.8 "time" says "The order relation on time values is the Order
relation on dateTime ( using an arbitrary date."  This, with the above
statement, seems to imply that under 1.0 (adding an arbitrary date),
'2009-11-02T23:00:00-03:00' denoted a value equal to '2009-11-02T02:00:00Z',
which I don't think was the case.

If the literal '23:00:00-03:00' were mapped to the value 02:00:00, then I could
see how it would have been considered equal to '02:00:00Z' under 1.0, but I
don't see where that is called for.  Additionally, the rules in include
a step for timezone normalization, which is meaningless if the timezone has
already been lost.

Also, Xerces tells me the following instance is not valid for the following
schema, which tells me at least Xerces considered these two times not equal.


<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
   <xs:element name="root">
         <xs:restriction base="xs:time">
            <xs:enumeration value="02:00:00Z"/>

Maybe some processors considered these times equal while others didn't?

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 2 November 2009 20:30:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:50:10 UTC