W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > November 2011

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

From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 16:23:39 +0000
Cc: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <CC9D0EB7-63DA-4C9F-86BF-EE0A3E717804@jenitennison.com>
To: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>

On 11 Nov 2011, at 15:55, Niklas Lindström wrote:
> I also think we should consider whether xsd:gYear, xsd:gYearMonth and
> xsd:gMonthDay can be captured as well (since years less than 1000 must
> be padded with leading zeros [1]). Of course, xsd:gMonth and xsd:gDay
> are too ambiguous, as today's date so amply indicates. ;)

xsd:gMonth and xsd:gDay aren't ambiguous. Months have the format --MM, so November is "--11" whereas days have the format ---DD so the 11th day of each month is "---11".

As I said in the mail I just sent, I don't know which subset of formats will be supported by the new <time> element.

Jeni Tennison
Received on Friday, 11 November 2011 16:24:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:27 UTC