Hi,

On 15 May 2011 18:26, Rintze Zelle <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Dan Stillman <[email protected]> wrote:


>> > I guess we can always play it by ear, but in any case leave the
>> > cs:updated value blank in the repo?

I would not do it (see below)

>> Yes, I think so.
>
> So you all agree that:
>
> a) the CSL 1.0.1 schema should require that the cs:updated element holds
> either a xsd:dateTime timestamp or have no content
>
> and
>
> b) that for styles in the git repo, cs:updated should be blank. So we should
> delete any existing timestamps, and make sure they aren't added for further
> commits.

I would not do it, I expect the cs:updated to have the timestamp in
the repository, so it's easy to clone, users can just browse the
repository using the github interface and download the ready-to-use
style, etc.

I would update the cs:updated when pushing with the pushing date, no?

-- 
Carles Pina | Software Engineer
http://www.mendeley.com/profiles/Carles-Pina/

Mendeley Limited | London, UK | www.mendeley.com
Registered in England and Wales | Company Number 6419015

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability
What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know.
Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools
to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay
_______________________________________________
xbiblio-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel

Reply via email to