- From: Sam Kuper <sam.kuper@uclmail.net>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:12:27 +0100
2009/7/30 Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Sam Kuper<sam.kuper at uclmail.net> wrote: > > Not for BCE; I'm not working on that period at the moment, but excepting > > that, here are a couple of good examples with ranges: > > http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/calendar/entry-10762.html > > http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/calendar/entry-295.html > > http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/calendar/entry-6611f.html > > Now, either there should be markup available for ranges, or it should at > > least be possible to specify components of a date independently of each > > other, and to imply (at least for humans) a "range" spanning these > different > > date elements as appropriate. > > Now, here's the million-dollar question: Why do you need <time> or > something like it for these dates? You seem to have them marked up > quite fine as it is. > 1) Machine readability. 2) Consistency across websites that mark up dates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090730/164aff55/attachment.htm>
Received on Thursday, 30 July 2009 09:12:27 UTC