Hi Douglas,

Thanks for a very thorough analysis.  A few quick notes ...

When we wrote W3CDTF in 1997, we included decimal fractions of a 
second, using the period (".") as the decimal separator.  I'm sure 
that was allowed at the time by ISO 8601.  From what you write, they
seem to have changed their minds since then.  Are you quite sure 
about that?

We also allowed an arbitrary number of digits after the decimal
separator.  Why are you proposing that we choose some fixed number 
of digits?

Ditto for years.

Have you, by any chance, looked at the XML Schema 1.1 draft?  I 
haven't studied it in any detail, but I have noted that quite a lot 
of work has gone into the date/time sections.

While I wouldn't suggest that we use XML Schema 1.0, due mainly to 
the lack of a compact syntax (requested by the Library folks), my 
eyebrows went up when reading your:

> personally I'm not sure about the appropriateness of using a 
> format designed for a particular markup language over an 
> international Standard

First of all, it is unusual to call XML "a particular markup 
language", as it is a foundation for the creation of markup 
languages.  AFAIK, it is only the 2nd widely adopted foundation 
markup language.  Furthermore, I think that XML has been adopted as 
an ISO standard, though I don't know the number and searching the 
ISO site and Google for "XML ISO standard" generates too many hits.

Misha



-----------------------------------------------------------------
        Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com

To find out more about Reuters Products and Services visit http://www.reuters.com/productinfo 

Any views expressed in this message are those of  the  individual
sender,  except  where  the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.