On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Sam Kuper<[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/7/30 Tab Atkins Jr. <[email protected]> >> >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Sam Kuper<[email protected]> wrote: >> > Not for BCE; I'm not working on that period at the moment, but excepting >> > that, here are a couple of good examples with ranges: >> > http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/calendar/entry-10762.html >> > http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/calendar/entry-295.html >> > http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/calendar/entry-6611f.html >> > Now, either there should be markup available for ranges, or it should at >> > least be possible to specify components of a date independently of each >> > other, and to imply (at least for humans) a "range" spanning these >> > different >> > date elements as appropriate. >> >> Now, here's the million-dollar question: Why do you need <time> or >> something like it for these dates? You seem to have them marked up >> quite fine as it is. > > 1) Machine readability.
This begs the question. Why do you need machine readability for the dates in the Darwin journals? More specifically, why do you need machine readability in a standardized fashion currently expected to be used primarily for adding dates to calendars? > 2) Consistency across websites that mark up dates. What form of consistency? Date format consistency? This varies by use-case, region, and language. Machine-format consistency? You then have to answer why such consistency is important - what does it let you *do*? ~TJ
