- From: Jeff Rafter <jeffrafter@definedweb.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:14:02 -0700
- To: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
- Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
[snip] > I would have preferred to allow no timezone at all than one that > has such minimal effect on semantics and comparison. Wow, glad to hear I am not alone in my dislike of the additional Time Zone Qualifiers-- especially with changing the semantics of the ISO. To be honest, I am surprised you guys were able to get the rec out the door after all that contreversy surrounding the date/time types. You all deserve some high praise for the ability to compromise! I am much happier with a Schema rec than I am unhappy with the Time Zone Qualifiers. > On the other hand, this should be taken as a warning > that solving users' problems with timezones is not nearly as easy as it > appears, and sometimes it is better to do less than to add complexity that > doesn't solve the problem. For better or worse, schemas effectively > provides timezone markers primarily as a convenience to those recording > times in an XML document; it carries little or no semantics compared to > the same time in UTC. That is a scary warning... Ultimately introducing this modified date time type will be difficult-- I am wondering if there is a way to modify the lexical space without affecting the value space. If there was a way, then we may be able to have future types that use Month and Day names as well-- localized to specific languages even. It seems what XML Schemas need is a way to concatenate simpleTypes (rather than a simple union). The need for this has come up a lot and would be a perfect construct here. Regards, Jeff Rafter Defined Systems http://www.defined.net XML Development and Developer Web Hosting
Received on Thursday, 5 July 2001 17:14:33 UTC