mbeckerle commented on a change in pull request #70: Adding property
binaryCalendarRep with values "binarySeconds" and "bi…
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-daffodil/pull/70#discussion_r190938576
##########
File path:
daffodil-test-ibm1/src/test/resources/test-suite/ibm-contributed/dpaext2.tdml
##########
@@ -327,7 +327,7 @@
<document><documentPart
type="byte">000000000000003C</documentPart></document>
<infoset>
<dfdlInfoset
xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";>
- <testBinaryMilliseconds
xsi:type="xs:dateTime">2009-12-24T05:15:00.060000+05:00</testBinaryMilliseconds>
+ <testBinaryMilliseconds
xsi:type="xs:dateTime">2009-12-24T05:15:00.060000+00:00</testBinaryMilliseconds>
Review comment:
Not sure about the DFDL spec here. The text above the definition of
calendarTimeZone says they are for calendars with text or binary
representation, but qualifies it with: "These properties can be used when a
calendar has dfdl:representation 'text' or dfdl:representation 'binary' and a
packed decimal representation." so indicates that calendarTimeZone doesn't
apply for binarySeconds or binaryMillseconds. The definition of
binaryCalendarEpoch says if no timezone is specified, UTC is used.
The property precedence section (23) of the DFDL spec is consistent with
this, indicating that binaryCalendarEpoch is used for binarySeconds and
binaryMilliseconds, and that calendarTimeZone is used for text and packed
decimals only.
In the test binaryCalendarEpoch says +5 timezone, then I think that is the
right answer regardless of what calendarTimeZone says.
So I think this should be +05:00 in the infoset of the test here.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
With regards,
Apache Git Services
