Yes, probably good to keep this reference in the comment. I'll change the
text to reflect this.
cheers
Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: A mailing list for the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative's Usage
Board [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Diane I. Hillmann
Sent: 30 March 2006 15:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Proposed definition for date
Andrew, et al.:
I wonder if we want to include the information on the YYYY-MM-DD
within the parenthetical, so that it read: (for example, the W3CDTF
profile of ISO 8601, which follows the YYYY-MM-DD format).
This would ensure that we're making the change we want without
necessarily eliminating the useful "easy" option.
Diane
>Hi all
>
>One of the current suggestions re amending the Element terms is for a new
>commentr for date that does not specify W3CDTF. I was tasked with proposing
>a revised wording which is appended hereunder. Comments especially welcome!
>
>cheers
>Andrew
>
>--------------------------------
>
>Old:
>"Typically, Date will be associated with the creation or availability of
the
>resource. Recommended best practice for encoding the date value is defined
>in a profile of ISO 8601 [W3CDTF] and follows the YYYY-MM-DD format."
>
>Proposed:
>
>"Typically, Date will be associated with the creation or availability of
the
>resource. Recommended best practice is to structure the date using a syntax
>encoding scheme (for example, the W3CDTF profile of ISO 8601)."
|