- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:45:51 -0700
At 10:45 +0000 19/07/09, Ian Hickson wrote: >On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, SJ Kissane wrote: >> >> I am concerned by the wording of this section. There are different >> systems of week number -- as far as I can work out, this is the same as >> ISO 8601 week numbering. But it nowhere explicitly says that. >> >> I think, the spec should have a normative reference to ISO 8601 for the >> definition of week numbering. Then, if the spec wants to give an >> informative recap of what ISO 8601 says, for the benefit of those who >> don't have a copy (especially since it isn't free), that's fine. But I'm >> worried, by inserting some complicated definition into the spec, does it >> match exactly ISO 8601's definition? (I'm sure it does, but "are the >> definitions the same?" is not immediately obvious from inspection.) > >They are not the same. ISO8601 doesn't define how you parse a week string, >how you handle errors in such a string, and so forth. The numbers are >compatible, and a valid HTML5 week string is an ISO8601 week string >(though I don't know if the opposite is the case), but that's about it. > >While we could have an non-normative reference, in practice, it wouldn't >add much, since (a) the HTML5 spec defines everything you might get from >ISO8601, and (b) we don't want to have implementors think "oh, it's the >same as ISO8601, I'll just use an ISO8601 date library", since such a >library might get the parsing details wrong in terms of what HTML5 says. an informative note to that effect might be a good idea. >-- >Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL >http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. >Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' -- David Singer Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Monday, 20 July 2009 10:45:51 UTC