Re: xml schema part 2: datatypes

Yes, good point.  Thanks!

Regards, Ashok


                                                                   
 (Embedded                                                         
 image moved to dog <dog@dog.net.uk>                               
 file:          05/07/99 01:04 PM                                  
 pic29110.pcx)                                                     
                                                                   




To:   paul.v.biron@kp.org, Ashok Malhotra/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc:
Subject:  xml schema part 2: datatypes




in http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2 you wrote:

Issue (dateTime-lexical-representation): We need to spell out the various
SQL and ISO 8601 representations (e.g., CCYYMMDD and CCYY-MM-DD, etc.) in
detail here, or in a (non-normative) appendix. We may also want to support
additional formats e.g. neither SQL or ISO 8601 seems to support the
12/25/1999 format for date. A lexical representation for dateTime as a
collection of elements may also be desirable. This issue also applies
to [date], [time] and [timePeriod].

note that such additional formats may be constrained by locale. for example,
in europe we use DD/MM/YYYY format not MM/DD/YYYY format, making 01/03/1999
ambiguous (1 march 1999 or 3 january 1999) without locale-specific
information.

i'm sure you were already aware of that, like.

dog