- From: Rob Manson <roBman@mob-labs.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 19:56:29 +1000
- To: "public-poiwg@w3.org" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
Are we looking at replicating the work that's already been done in iCalendar/VEVENT/hCalendar? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICalendar http://microformats.org/wiki/hcalendar roBman On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 11:29 +0200, Thomas Wrobel wrote: > http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime allows progressive detail down to > the fraction of a second. > > It doesn't seem to however cover specifying a time but not a date, > which I think is usefull when it comes to simple repetition. If we > want to allow time specification without a date then we do need a > co-existing alternative. > -- > Also, I strongly feel we should rename this element. > Time is highly generic and can mean many things ("creation time? > opening time? time of the data being put online? etc"). The name > should be clear. > Assuming we have two elements to determine a time range (both optional), > Id suggest having it "ExistanceStart" or just "Start" to clarifying we > are specifying the range the POIs exists from or over. A similar > "End" field would be used to mark the end of the range. > (a missing start or end would just mean the range of the POI in time > goes to infinity in that direction....ie, has existed forever or will > exist forever, or both. Both specified without a date could indicate a > repeating range etc) > > > > > ~~~~~~ > Reviews of anything, by anyone; > www.rateoholic.co.uk > Please try out my new site and give feedback :) > > > > On 12 May 2011 07:33, Leigh L. Klotz, Jr. <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com> wrote: > > Matt Womer wrote > >>It was said that time should be optional, I had tried to indicate that it > >> is by saying "can have one or more", > >>which was meant to imply "has zero or more". I've changed the text to say > >> "MAY have one or more". > > ... > >>As for representing the time itself, I've pulled in info from XML Schema > >> Datatypes, but that only gives us > >>some primitives to play with, not how we're going to put them together. > > > > One option for the xsd:dateTime and xsd:date type is to allow either type in > > cases where you have date and optional time. > > They're lexically distinct, so this works for XSD structures or for RNC > > structures describing XML, and for JSON, etc. > > > > 2011-05-11T12:24:45-0000 > > and > > 2011-05-11 > > > > So the latter indicates a date without a time (precision). > > > > Similarly, if you want to allow dateTime or time (and default the date via > > context) it's also lexically distinct. > > > > Leigh. > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 12 May 2011 10:23:24 UTC