Re: [whatwg] <time>

Robert J Burns wrote:

> So again, if we aren't experts on calendars and date formats then we  
> also shouldn't presume we can provide the additional criteria  
> agreements to expand ISO 8601 beyond the 1582 to 9999 dates. 

Agreed, although I think that W3C specs should be consistent with each
other, even if they extend ISO 8601. In this case the relevant specs are 
XSD Schema, and XQuery and Xpath.

In particular XPath and Xquery say this:

http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/#durations-dates-times


For a number of the above datatypes [XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second
Edition] extends the basic [ISO 8601] lexical representations, such as
YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss.s for dateTime, by allowing a preceding minus sign,
more than four digits to represent the year field no maximum is
specified and an unlimited number of digits for fractional seconds. Leap
seconds are not supported.

All minimally conforming processors must support positive year
values with a minimum of 4 digits (i.e., YYYY) and a minimum fractional
second precision of 1 millisecond or three digits (i.e.,
s.sss). However, conforming processors may set larger
implementation-defined limits on the maximum number of digits
they support in these two situations. Processors may also choose
to support the year 0000 and years with negative values. The results of
operations on dates that cross the year 0000 are
implementation-defined.



David

________________________________________________________________________
The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs. 
________________________________________________________________________

Received on Friday, 13 March 2009 09:34:18 UTC