- From: Deborah L. McGuinness <dlm@ksl.stanford.edu>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 08:27:37 -0400
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- CC: Michael Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>, public-owl-wg <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
hi - i am about to get on a plane and go out of connectivity so i will make this quick. my main applications of time are in scientific observations. data comes in and it is taken by an instrument at a particular time. the instruments in my current locations are stationary so i can figure out the location and thus the time zone. the data is then retrieved by a start and stop time. (actually the data retrieval time is a description like retrieve data taken by instrument x at a time of high geomagnetic activity... the application figures out that high geomagnetic activity is actually at times where kp index is greater than 7 and then we figure out when that is. then the actual web queries ask for data from instrument x from start time year1, month1, day1 for the following time increment (currently time increments are in days). the deployed services only have year / month / day but we are starting to look at data repositories that also have or will have hour minute and second. deborah Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > > Hi Deb, > > Could you say a bit about how the datetime data is used? Are you > simply doing retrieval? Sorting (if so, how to compare those > with/without timezone?) > > Best, > Alan > > On Jul 25, 2008, at 7:45 AM, Deborah L. McGuinness wrote: > >> >> My applications make heavy use of xsd datetime. >> my issue in applications is that i have unpredictable data details. >> sometimes i have year, month, day, (sometimes with and sometimes >> without timezone) >> and sometimes i also have hour and minutes (and sometimes even >> seconds) sometimes with and sometimes without timezone. >> >> so i would NOT support a requirement that all data either does or >> does have a time zone ; >> i would support an approach that allows me to have optional timezones. >> >> thanks, >> deborah >> Michael Smith wrote: >>> On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 12:27 +0100, Uli Sattler wrote: >>> >>> >>>> the 'easy' support for time that I was advocating yesterday seems >>>> to fit in nicely with this: >>>> >>>> - absence of a time zone (so I guess we would only support a >>>> *restriction* of xsd:dateTime, but this should be ok) >>>> >>> >>> I think we either need all constants to have a timezone, or none. I >>> prefer the first based on the assumption that more data "in the wild" >>> has timezones, and that such data is more completely defined. >>> >>> >>>> - the value space is continuous (since seconds are decimals between >>>> 0 and 60, according to my reading of Mike's [1]) and therefor, >>>> from an algorithms perspective, isomorphic to owl:number and thus >>>> it shouldn't be too much of a burden on the implementors. >>>> >>> >>> Agreed. >>> >>> >> >> > >
Received on Friday, 25 July 2008 12:28:14 UTC