Re: An approach to xsd:dateTime

Bijan Parsia wrote:
> On 25 Jul 2008, at 12:45, 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.
> Then it seems to me that we need a fairly detailed proposal or 
> requirements or examples from you. The datetime stuff *quickly* gets 
> ratholey, esp. from an implementation point of view. If we are going 
> to include *something* not essentially trivial, we need active champions.
> And the real question, I'd wager, is what can we realistically get 
> interop on. You're probably not much worse off if timezones are a 
> non-standard extension than if *all* of datetime is a non-standard 
> extension.
i agree with both of the points here and have a comment
a - how do we decide what we can realistically get interoperability on?  
is there any current work on xml datatypes with respect to datetime?
b - yes - having just timezone be a nonstandard extension to datetime is 
a simpler thing to sell.
> Cheers,
> Bijan.

Received on Friday, 25 July 2008 12:42:07 UTC