[Bug 3256] BC dates

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3256

           Summary: BC dates
           Product: XML Schema
           Version: 1.1 only
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2
        AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org
        ReportedBy: mike@saxonica.com
         QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org


QT approved comment

In the first note in 3.3.8.1, it's a bit unfortunate to say "The year 1 BCE was
represented by a ˇyearˇ value of −1" because it begs the question as to
what "1 BCE" means. The whole point is that usages differ. In fact "1 BCE"
usually refers to a year in the proleptic Julian calendar, not a year in the
proleptic Gregorian calendar, and they aren't the same thing. It would be
better to say "The year before year 1 in the proleptic Gregorian calendar was
represented as -1". Perhaps it would also be appropriate to say that whereas
historians have traditionally referred to the year before 1 AD as 1BC [yes, I
mean that, "BCE" is a modern and ugly Americanism], we are following
ISO-8601:2000 which has decided differently. The "caution should be used" is a
wonderful euphemism. Why not just admit "this is an incompatible change. Those
previously-valid documents burnt onto imperishable laser discs in your national
archives are now invalid. Sorry, you'll just have to live with it.".
Alternatively, why not do the decent thing and provide a version attribute to
preserve compatibility?

Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2006 11:15:58 UTC