[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Simon St.Laurent scripsit:
> > If the schema
> >language or an individual schema required some cryptic, proprietary
> >format I would agree. But any educated person can *understand*
> >'2002-06-11' without too much effort.
>
> I dunno. Is that June 11 or November 6? A normalization that makes sense
> to your kind of educated person may not make sense to mine.
Oh, come on, Simon, don't overstate your case. *Nobody* uses year-day-month
dates, thank Ghu.
> It has everything to do with whether normalization is good or
> necessary. As W3C XML Schema enforces normalization, those types are also
> polluted by this for purposes of this conversation.
In document-centric contexts, the right application is probably something
like this:
Julius Caesar was assassinated on <date gDate="-43-03-13">the ides of
March, 710 A.U.C.</date>,
So the content tells us the Roman date, and the gDate attribute (of type
gDate, obviously) gives us the Gregorian equivalent. Only the latter
has an XSD type.
> "Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue
"Your uncle is not sick. He only thinks he is sick. Let him repeat
EDIEWIGBAB once a day for six months and he will be cured."
Six months pass...
"How is your uncle?"
"He thinks he is dead."
--
John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith. --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_
|
