Andrew Wilson wrote:
> "Typically, Date will be associated with the creation or availability of
> the resource. A date value may be a single date or a date range. Date
> values may express temporal information at any level of granularity
> (including time). Recommended best practice for encoding the date value
> is to supply an unambiguous representation of the single date or date
> range using a widely-recognized syntax (e.g., YYYY-MM-DD for a single
> date; YYYY-MM-DD/YYYY-MM-DD for a date range; YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM to
> specify a single date and time down to the minute)."
>
> The Madrid meeting notes say that we agreed to adopt this new comment from
> the WG so I'm proposing to replace the version that currently exists in the
> DCMES changes document with the version above.
>
> Pete, does this version satisfy your concern about the wording?
It does, though taking Diane's point about naming syntax encoding
schemes, the example includes a date range ("YYYY-MM-DD/YYYY-MM-DD"),
but - as far as I can recall, I confess I've lost track a bit! - we
don't yet have a syntax encoding scheme that covers this case, right?
i.e. it's not covered by W3CDTF, the DC Date WG hasn't yet proposed a
new date range scheme, and - again, as far as I can recall - there isn't
an XML Schema datatype that covers this.
So saying "you could use this representation" and saying also "you
should indicate explicitly the syntax encoding scheme" kind of begs the
question of how people can do that.
Pete
--
Pete Johnston
Research Officer (Interoperability)
UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
tel: +44 (0)1225 383619 fax: +44 (0)1225 386838
mailto:[log in to unmask]
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/p.johnston/
|