- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:27:08 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7678
C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Keywords| |needsAgreement
--- Comment #2 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> 2009-09-28 16:27:07 ---
[speaking for myself]
Thank you for the comments. I plead guilty to the error in the definition of
leap second. I would fix it by changing "added to the last day of December,
June, October, or March" to "added to the last day of a month (by preference
December, June, October, or March)", but I can also live with the proposal in
comment 1, which I take to amount to "delete 'to the last day of December,
June, October, or March' and 'such'". (It also suggests deleting "all other
discussion", but I would prefer to keep changes to a minimum.)
With regard to the possible effects of an abolition of leap seconds; if it
appears likely that civil authorities will increase their offsets from UTC
(rather than UTC introducing a leap hour once it is about an hour off of solar
time), then I believe a future version of the XSD specification (if there are
any) might usefully relax the maximum offset for date / time values.
I don't pretend to understand the ins and outs of Posix time handling, and with
respect to the last paragraph of the issue description note only that the spec
describes the offset as an offset from UTC, not from Posix time_t. I hope
rather than affirm that this means no adjustment to the text is necessary in
order for the behavior of XSD types to be well defined in the event that the
scenario described in the issue description comes to pass.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 16:27:16 UTC