- From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 15:57:25 -0800
- To: "Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, public-html@w3.org
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 07:17, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru> wrote: > Hello, Tantek. > > Thank you and Sam for your attention to my proposals. See my comments below. > > > 07.12.2011, 04:34, "Tantek Çelik" <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>: > >> Hi Marat, >> >> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:20, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com >> <mtanalin@yandex.ru> wrote: >>> 11.11.2011, 02:14, "Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net>: >>>> I encourage people to focus on creating concrete proposals, ideally on >>>> the wiki. >>> My proposals for TIME element: >>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/User:Mtanalin/time_element >> Thanks very much for writing up your proposals for improving the time element. >> >> Sam has asked me to analyze your proposals and see if we can work >> together to achieve consensus on at least aspects of our proposals. >> Here's a start. >>> Topics concerned: >> I'd like to work together on each topic one-by-one to see if we can >> achieve consensus, if even incrementally. >>> * Simplify datetime syntax >>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/User:Mtanalin/time_element#h-simplify-datetime >> Let's start with the first part of this proposal, which is to >> >> "Avoid "T" as date/time separator, and use space character (U+0020) instead" >> >> The "T" separator comes from the ISO8601 syntax, and while not ideal I >> don't think it is necessary to drop it, and supporting a syntax that >> from an established standard has its own benefits. >> >> However, your suggestion of permitting a "space character (U+0020) >> instead" is a good improvement, and one that makes sense to me. >> >> I've documented it with a bit more detail, and included research on >> existing support for use of a space character to separate date and >> time in the Time element page on the WHATWG wiki (referencing your >> proposal as inspiration). >> >> [1] http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Time_element#permit_space_instead_of_T_in_datetimes >> >> Please let me know if that reflects your intent. > > Yes, I'm fine with coexisting space and "T" characters as equivalent date/time separators. In other words, it's OK for me to keep "T" as allowed separator while being able to use space character instead of "T" where the space character is more appropriate (e.g. provides less verbose and more DRY markup). > >> I've updated my enhance time element proposal[2] to: >> >> a) drop discussion of pubdate (which is covered by a different change >> proposal and issue) since we differ on this, and can follow-up >> separately/orthogonally. > > Could you provide information on what exact change proposal and issue do you mean as for @pubdate discussion? > >> b) incorporate the year-week enhancement (since there doesn't seem to >> be any objections to this) >> >> c) incorporate the space instead of "T" enhancement you proposed per >> the documentation/research on the time element page [1] >> >> [2] http://www.w3.org/wiki/User:Tantekelik/time_element >> >> With the removal of the "drop pubdate" portion, and the addition of >> the date-space-time microsyntax, please let me know if you can live >> with the change proposal[2] overall, as that will allow us to make >> progress on resolving issue 183[3]: >> >> [3] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/183 >> >> Thanks, >> >> Tantek > > With the removal of the "drop pubdate" portion, and the addition of space character as allowed alternative for "T" as date/time separator, your proposal [2] seems to be fine for me in its current form. Thanks Marat. In continuing with: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 16:34, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:20, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com > Sam has asked me to analyze your proposals and see if we can work > together to achieve consensus on at least aspects of our proposals. > Here's a start. > >> Topics concerned: > > I'd like to work together on each topic one-by-one to see if we can > achieve consensus, if even incrementally. I'm working my way through the rest of Marat's proposals and documenting each one where I've been (historically) documenting all the individual <time> element modification/enhancement proposals on the WHATWG wiki page on the time element. The next proposal from Marat is the 'tz' attribute proposal: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Time_element#tz_attribute In the interests of resolving this proposal, I've added a discussion section. http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Time_element#tz_attribute_discussion I myself don't see a need for a 'tz' attribute and have indicated as such with my reasons. However, I encourage folks to add more opinions with their reasoning as well in the hopes that we can find a common ground to move this particular aspect forward to a consensus, and the wiki page can serve as documentation towards that. Thanks, Tantek
Received on Saturday, 14 January 2012 23:58:54 UTC