- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:47:59 +0000 (UTC)
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Asbj?rn Ulsberg wrote: > On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:59:11 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote: > >> > >> - the literal letters T and Z must be uppercase > > > > Any technical reason why they have to? > > Any reason why they don't? It simplifies processing a tiny amount. > > It would help people understand what the difference to RFC 3339 is. > > Indeed, and this is exactly what we did in RFC 4287, as I've pointed out > previously. And I can't say that date parsing has proven to be an issue > there at all, even with the little work we did on narrowing down and > tightening the syntax. Section 3.3. of RFC 4287 says: > > A Date construct is an element whose content MUST conform > to the "date-time" production in [RFC3339]. In addition, > an uppercase "T" character MUST be used to separate date > and time, and an uppercase "Z" character MUST be present > in the absence of a numeric time zone offset. > > Perhaps HTML5 needs more detailing than this for parsing, but not > referencing RFC 3339 just for the sake of not referencing RFC 3339 > doesn't make much sense imho. > > For authoring (and parsing, infact), RFC 3339 plus a couple of > additional guidelines have proven to be enough for implementors of RFC > 4287, so assume HTML5 could be better off doing the same, no? HTML5 now references ISO8601 directly in a non-normative note explaining why ISO8601 isn't referenced normatively. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 10 August 2009 16:47:59 UTC