- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:14:52 +0100
- To: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- CC: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Tom Duhamel <tom420.duhamel@gmail.com>, whatwg@lists.whatwg.org, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Robert J Burns 2009-03-16 12.32: > On Mar 15, 2009, at 6:59 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > Even the Mayan Long Count > calendar can be represented in something resembling ISO 8601 by allowing > more than the three fields for the date (e.g., > "12-19-16-03-03t19:57+00:00"). > Again, HTML UAs can easily allow the > representation of these various calendar dates without imposing any > requirement burden on UAs to support conversion and extraction of these > alternative calendar dates (merely a requirement to recognize calendar > keywords and ignore unsupported calendars; in the case of Julian the > ISO-8601-style representation translates to the exact same localized > month names from 44 BC onward). I can live with @datetime limited to ISO-8601, as long as @datetime also lives up to ISO-8601's own limitations: It isn't valid beyond 1582-10-15, and user agents that look at @datetime in order to present the date (to solve the ambiguous date problem), MUST therefore warn that it present a date which isn't valid for the time period. Even for dates before 20 May 1875 (the reference point for ISO 8601 - the signing of the meter convention, and the start of the standardising process, you could say) - Japan began using the Gregorian calendar around this time - it would be customary to inform the user that the date displayed is the Gregorian date. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Monday, 16 March 2009 12:15:36 UTC