W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > June 2019

Re: [dxwg] [I18N] Various date types could be more specific (#957)

From: Stephen Richard via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 15:03:35 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-505915644-1561561414-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
 https://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime defines 6 options for date or date+time formatting. Here they are with xsd equivalents if they exist:
      YYYY (eg 1997)  == xsd:gYear
   Year and month:
      YYYY-MM (eg 1997-07)  == xsd:gYearMonth
   Complete date:
      YYYY-MM-DD (eg 1997-07-16) == xsd:date

   Complete date plus hours and minutes:
      YYYY-MM-DDThh:mmTZD (eg 1997-07-16T19:20+01:00)  (NO XSD equivalent-- xsd doesn't have time zone, or a time format hh:mm without seconds)

   Complete date plus hours, minutes and seconds:
      YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssTZD (eg 1997-07-16T19:20:30+01:00)  (ALMOST equivalent to xsd:dateTime, but xsd doesn't allow for time zone)

   Complete date plus hours, minutes, seconds and a decimal fraction of a second
      YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss.sTZD (eg 1997-07-16T19:20:30.45+01:00)  (ALMOST XSD equivalent-- xsd doesn't have time zone, and its unclear if xsd allows decimal for fractions of a second)

The options allowed by xsd or https://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime give 7 possibilities-not unmanageable for writing parsers, but I wouldn't want to have to deal with even more possibilities.  Are there rdf datatype codes that can be used to type literals using https://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime formats that are not equivalent to xsd types? If not , it doesn't seem like a good idea to recommend using that. 

GitHub Notification of comment by smrgeoinfo
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/957#issuecomment-505915644 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2019 15:03:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:28:30 UTC