W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: Question on Data types

From: <petsa@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 09:40:29 -0500
To: "Nishiseki, Ernest" <NishisekiE@DNB.com>
cc: "'www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8525689E.00509718.00@D51MTA03.pok.ibm.com>
Thank you for your question.  We decided not to allow truncated
because there is an ambiguity about the meaning.  Take for example,
Does this mean the instant 2000-03-25T23:00:00 or does it means the hour
that starts at

We have extensively revised the date and time datatypes.  These will be
reflected in the
next WD.  We would appreciate your comments.

All the best, Ashok

"Nishiseki, Ernest" <NishisekiE@DNB.com>@w3.org on 03/03/2000 10:35:26 AM

Sent by:  www-xml-schema-comments-request@w3.org

To:   "'www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Subject:  Question on Data types


I have been looking through the XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes W3C Working
Draft 25 February 2000
and have a question concerning the lexical representation of the
datatype (section
timeInstant Lexical Representation).

Does the timeInstant lexical representation support the ISO 8601 reduced
precision formats of time (i.e.,
can the fraction of seconds, seconds, minutes be omitted).

So, for example, are the following valid timeInstant literals:


Also, is the same concept of reduced precision for time permissible in the
recurringInstant and time datatypes?


Ernest Nishiseki
Senior Architect
Dun & Bradstreet
220 East 42nd Street, 9th Floor
New York, N.Y. 10017
Tel: (212) 883-3466
Fax: (212) 557-8200
email: nishisekie@dnb.com
Received on Friday, 10 March 2000 09:40:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:08:46 UTC