W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2009

[whatwg] Issues relating to the syntax of dates and times

From: WeBMartians <webmartians@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 19:29:09 -0500
Message-ID: <559F6629BB864D05893E9CDCCF41DD29@pirate>
Asbj?rn, while I can't give you a message-list, please believe me when I say that the HTML5 specifications on this are the result of
quite a bit of discussion and IMHO represent a reasonable compromise between driving the developers crazy and supporting dates and
times back to the Cenozoic era.

That said, I'm staying out of this one! ...been here too many times already...
-----Original Message-----
From: whatwg-bounces@lists.whatwg.org [mailto:whatwg-bounces@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Asbj?rn Ulsberg
Sent: Friday, 2009 January 02 16:53
To: Ian Hickson
Cc: whatwg at lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Issues relating to the syntax of dates and times

On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 11:09:24 +0100, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:

> The spec draws the line already -- it says that the date has to be in 
> the proleptic Gregorian calendar, and that the year has to be greater 
> than zero.

Reading the spec, I have to wonder: Does HTML5 need to specify as much as it does inline? Can't more of it be referenced to ISO 8601
or even better; RFC 3339? I really fancy how Atom (RFC 4287) has defined date constructs: 

<http://www.atompub.org/rfc4287.html#date.constructs>

Does not RFC 3339 defined date and time in a satisfactory manner to use directly in HTML5? If there's prior discussion regarding
this, I'd really appreciate a pointer. Thanks!

-- 
Asbj?rn Ulsberg         -=|=-          asbjorn at ulsberg.no
?He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away?
Received on Friday, 2 January 2009 16:29:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:09 UTC