- From: Ashok Malhotra <ashokma@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:20:13 -0800
- To: "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@dyomedea.com>
- Cc: <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <E5B814702B65CB4DA51644580E4853FB01488607@red-msg-12.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
First of all, apologies for taking so long to reply to your message on 10/28 below. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0107.html You asked a general question, so I'm not sure exactly what you were after. If this answer is not to the question you asked, please ask again. I believe you are referring to the general structure for deriving date/time types that was in the CR. The reason we removed this and ended up with specific, primitive date/time types were: 1) The general structure let you define date/time types that were meaningless and that no one would support e.g. a period of 3 days occurring every five days. 2) XML Schema datatypes define a particular mechanism for type derivation. This mechanism could not be applied to the general structure to create useful types such as date and time. All the best, Ashok =========================================================== Message-ID: <3BDBDD24.7030204@dyomedea.com> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 11:25:40 +0100 From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com <mailto:vdv@dyomedea.com?Subject=Re:%20Reason%20for%20change%20between%20CR%20and%20Rec.&In-Reply-To=%3c3BDBDD24.7030204@dyomedea.com%3e&References=%3c3BDBDD24.7030204@dyomedea.com%3e> > To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org <mailto:www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org?Subject=Re:%20Reason%20for%20change%20between%20CR%20and%20Rec.&In-Reply-To=%3c3BDBDD24.7030204@dyomedea.com%3e&References=%3c3BDBDD24.7030204@dyomedea.com%3e> Subject: Reason for change between CR and Rec. The CR release of W3C XML Schema was much closer to ISO 8061 by defining fewer primitive related datatypes and more facets derive arbitrary user defined datatypes. The overall mechanism was probably more complex, but some features such as defining recurring points in time with arbitrary periods have been sacrified to this simplification. Could someone from the WG be kind enough to summarize the reasons which had led to this decision? Thanks Eric (not wanting to be critical, but just to understand) -- Rendez-vous à Paris pour le Forum XML. http://www.technoforum.fr/Pages/forumXML01/index.html
Received on Monday, 17 December 2001 19:20:46 UTC