- From: Pentasis <pentasis@lavabit.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:16:30 +0200
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch> To: "Pentasis" <pentasis at lavabit.com> Cc: <whatwg at lists.whatwg.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 10:52 PM Subject: Re: [whatwg] Issues relating to the syntax of dates and times > On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote: >> >> "The primary use cases for these elements are for marking up publication >> dates e.g. in blog entries, and for marking event dates in hCalendar >> markup. Thus the DOM APIs are likely to be used as ways to generate >> interactive calendar widgets or some such." >> >> I agree with this, so disregard my previous remarks on this subject. I >> would however recommend dropping the word "primary". > > I wouldn't want to make people think their particular use case was > excluded. What if someone wanted to use a date to indicate the time an > entry was added, for instance? Hence the word "primary". > > That whole paragraph might be rewritten in due course though to not refer > to use cases (I try to keep the spec clear of actually using the term > explicitly and instead just show the use cases in examples). > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' This confuses me again ;-) Sorry. Are you saying that examples and use-cases will be excluded from the spec? If so, than I disagree with it again. Like I stated before, I understand that times/dates are never *exact* (esp. very old ones). So either this element should get a limited use-case (like blog entries, calendar dates for meetings etc.) or should be able to handle all time/date use-cases (even fictional ones). Either way, this should be explicitly defined or excluded in the spec. shouldn't it? Bert
Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2008 13:16:30 UTC