Looking at the time element (again) (ISSUE-97)

Now that <time> seems to be back into the picture, I have looked at ISSUE-97 again[1].

The issue, as raised by Stéphane, proposes to understand the '@datetime' property of the <time> element. Essentially, if the source contains this:

<time property="something" datetime="2009-05-10">May 10th 2009</time>

we should, implicitly, consider this as being

<time property="something" datetime="2009-05-10" content="2009-05-10">May 10th 2009</time>

and then let the core RDFa processing go. That is of course easy.

However... do we want to add a datatype to this? One would think so, but then we get to a very slippery slope. Which datatype? Looking at 

http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#date

we do have quite a lot of possibilities... There is of course xsd:dateTime (this is what Stéphane used in his original mail for the issue). This would mean the transformation of the <time> element into:

<time property="something" datetime="2009-05-10" content="2009-05-10T00:00:00-00:00" datatype="xsd:dateTime">May 10th 2009</time>

but there are a bunch of others, like gYear, gYearMonth, etc.

Personally, I would propose to use xsd:dateTime only. But that has to be decided by the group.

However, nothing with time is simple... If the author puts in the whole ISO format, then are of course fine. But I would expect that in the vast majority of cases the hour and minute and the others will all be missing. Is it all right to just add the 0 hour, as Stéphane did it? Again, I can live with that, but this is something to be decided and known for interoperability reasons...

Minor things, but should be cast in stone:-)

Ivan



[1] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/97

----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 12:48:18 UTC