On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 11:09:24 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
The spec draws the line already -- it says that the date has to be in the
proleptic Gregorian calendar, and that the year has to be greater than
zero.
Reading the spec, I have to wonder: Does HTML5 need to specify as much as
On 2 Jan 2009, at 21:53, Asbjørn Ulsberg wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 11:09:24 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
The spec draws the line already -- it says that the date has to be
in the
proleptic Gregorian calendar, and that the year has to be greater
than
zero.
Reading the spec,
Asbjørn, while I can't give you a message-list, please believe me when I say
that the HTML5 specifications on this are the result of
quite a bit of discussion and IMHO represent a reasonable compromise between
driving the developers crazy and supporting dates and
times back to the Cenozoic era.
- Original Message -
From: Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 12:32 AM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Issues relating to the syntax of dates and times
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
But the way it
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
Like I said, I completely understand the issues here. It just seems a
bit strange to me to choose one specific calendar and promote that one
to exact.
Well it's the calendar in use by a large part of the world. It's not just
any random calendar. :-)
- Original Message -
From: Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Issues relating to the syntax of dates and times
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
No, I
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006, Henri Sivonen wrote:
Why does WA 1.0 require the year to be exactly 4 digits long when in WF
2.0 it is four or more digits?
Fixed.
Why doesn't WA 1.0 make 1 AD the first year thus dodging the year zero
issue like WF 2.0?
Fixed.
Have I understood correctly, that
Ian Hickson wrote:
While I could see that maybe one day there'd be a use case for time that
would need historical dates, I really think that we'd have to tackle other
calendars in use today before looking at calendars that aren't in use
anymore. So I'd rather punt this for now.
While it is
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 7:36 AM, Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
While I could see that maybe one day there'd be a use case for time that
would need historical dates, I really think that we'd have to tackle other
calendars in use today before looking at calendars that
- Original Message -
From: Tab Atkins Jr.
To: Pentasis
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Issues relating to the syntax of dates and times
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 7:36 AM, Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ian
I suddenly noticed this line in the spec:
The primary use cases for these elements are for marking up publication dates
e.g. in blog entries, and for marking event dates in hCalendar markup. Thus the
DOM APIs are likely to be used as ways to generate interactive calendar widgets
or some such.
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
The primary use cases for these elements are for marking up publication
dates e.g. in blog entries, and for marking event dates in hCalendar
markup. Thus the DOM APIs are likely to be used as ways to generate
interactive calendar widgets or some such.
- Original Message -
From: Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Issues relating to the syntax of dates and times
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
The primary use
Pentasis wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
The primary use cases for these elements are for marking up publication
dates e.g. in blog entries, and for marking event dates in hCalendar
markup. Thus the DOM APIs are likely to be used as ways to generate
interactive
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
This confuses me again ;-) Sorry. Are you saying that examples and
use-cases will be excluded from the spec?
I'm saying that examples of use cases will be included, and that the words
use cases will generally be avoided.
Like I stated before, I
Lachlan Hunt ha scritto:
Pentasis wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
The primary use cases for these elements are for marking up
publication
dates e.g. in blog entries, and for marking event dates in hCalendar
markup. Thus the DOM APIs are likely to be used as
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Calogero Alex Baldacchino wrote:
In other words, the normative section of the spec will be as generic as
possible, while a non-normative section will cover a bounch of use cases
and examples, without pretending to be exahustive with regard to all
possible use cases. Am
- Original Message -
From: Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
This confuses me again ;-) Sorry. Are you saying that examples and
use-cases will be excluded from the spec?
I'm saying that examples of use cases will be included, and that the words
Ian Hickson ha scritto:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Calogero Alex Baldacchino wrote:
In other words, the normative section of the spec will be as generic as
possible, while a non-normative section will cover a bounch of use cases
and examples, without pretending to be exahustive with regard to all
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Pentasis wrote:
But the way it is described now still creates a difference in *possible*
markup between:
The battle of waterloo was fought on time datetime=1815-06-18Sunday
18 June 1815/time
and:
Julius Ceasar was assassinated on the ides of march in the year
20 matches
Mail list logo
