(13/04/28 22:36), Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > For such interchange purposes, I don't think is is necessary to relax > the date format rules. Note that ISO 8601 says that formatting > simplifications such as leaving out the T is permitted with mutual > agreement between the parties interchanging a data. It isn't clear > who the other party is that Ecma-262 could reach such an agreement > with.
The natural fit would be JS users and I think it would be fine to say that W3C HTML WG represents this party. > Like I said above, I think it would be fine for there to be a spec. > that adds additional browser implementation spec. format extensions > for Date.parse. However, it should only just align with the HTML > spec. It also needs to align with the current browser reality for > Date.parse. But the HTML spec is not aligning with current browser reality for Date.parse :( (13/05/01 23:45), Jason Orendorff wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock > <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Or maybe we should both just stick to a valid subset of ISO 8601. >>> >>> Do you mean: achieve consistency by having HTML retract its >>> extensions to ISO 8601? I'm pretty sure that ship has sailed. >> >> Strictly speaking, so has ES55/5.1's date format. > > There's a difference, though, between adding and removing > functionality. Adding support for spaces in 15.9.1.15 is > backward-compatible. Removing support for spaces from HTML, as you > propose, wouldn't be. Right. But before thinking about HTML, it might be useful to ask if V8/nodeJS, being a non-browser ES implementation, is willing to remove support for spaces? Cheers, Kenny -- Web Specialist, Opera Sphinx Game Force, Oupeng Browser, Beijing Try Oupeng: http://www.oupeng.com/ _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
