- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 22:59:00 +0000 (UTC)
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Tantek ?~Gelik wrote: > > Currently the datetime attribute requires both a date and a time. > > On the other hand, the time element's datetime attribute allows just a > date. > > Allowing just a date [is] easier for hand-authoring [...]. Authors can > more easily add ins/del elements with explicit datetime attributes if > they are permitted to specify only the date (they might not know or care > about the precise time), e.g. in blog posts that are updated by the > author. > > [Allowing just a date] avoids artificial precision. Forcing an explicit > date and time forces authors to enter artificial precision (e.g. > YYYY-MM-DDT00:00:00Z instead of YYYY-MM-DD). Allowing just dates permits > authors to convey that a del/ins occurred on a certain day, and that the > precise time is unknown or irrelevant. > > this happens to me often when I have blog-like or other essay content > that I update by hand. Since I typically do updates to any particular > content about once a day, day-level granularity is sufficient. Picking > an arbitrary time seems like being forced to provide "fake" metadata > which I don't want to do. Fixed. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 24 August 2010 15:59:00 UTC