Wouldn't it be better to use iso8601 as internal format? ons. 1. jul. 2015, 18.45 skrev Markus Krötzsch < [email protected]>:
> On 01.07.2015 18:14, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > On 07/01/2015 07:00 AM, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Markus Krötzsch > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Dear Pierpaolo, > >>> > >>> This thread was only about Julian and Gregorian calendar dates. If and > >>> how other calendar models should be supported in some future is > >>> another (potentially big) discussion. As you said, there are many > >>> issues there. Let's first make sure that we handle the "easy" 99.9% of > >>> cases correctly before discussing any more complicated options. > >> > >> Lydia Pintscher in the starting email explained that there's a model for > >> calendars, and unfortunately this model could be (and has been) > >> interpreted in two ways (AFAIU). > >> > >> My intention was to point out that one of the two interpretations is not > >> sound. This leaves the other one as the only viable one. > >> > >> Cheers P. > > > > It appears (from the email only---there are no pointers to enduring > > documentation on the solution that are attached to the relevant classes > or > > poperties) that the chosen method is to store dates in both the source > > calendar and the proleptic Gegorian calendar > > ( > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat#calendar_model_screwup > ). > > As you point out, this is not a viable solution for calendars whose days > do > > not start at the same time as days in the proleptic Gegorian calendar > > (unless, of course, there is time and location information also > available). > > The Wikidata date implementation intentionally restricts to dates that > are compatible with the Gregorian calendar. Although the system refers > to Wikidata item ids of calendar models to denote "Proleptic Gregorian" > and "Proleptic Julian", the system does not allow users or bots to enter > arbitrary items as calendar model. > > My understanding (and the implementation in WDTK) is that all dates are > provided in Gregorian calendar with a calendar model that specifies how > they should be displayed (if possible). The date in the source calendar > is for convenience and maybe for technical reasons on the side of the > PHP implementation. At no time should the source calendar date be > impossible to convert to Gregorian. We have had extensive discussions > about this point -- Gregorian must remain the main format at all times. > > This does not mean that we cannot have more models in the future. There > is (currently unused) timezone information, which can be used to store > offsets. Once fully implemented, this might allow exact conversion from > calendar models that have another start for their days. So maybe this is > not a case of real incompatibility. However, the timezone support for > current dates needs to be finished before discussing the next steps into > more exotic calendars. > > Best regards, > > Markus > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
