I think the existing format was probably adopted from what was there,
but I'm not sure. The source actually contains a parser that can
handle those string dates (and other things), and that's what
MLZ/Juris-M uses. You can turn it on with:
citeproc.opt.development_extensions.raw_date_parsing = true;
Nobody has ever liked the date input format. There was a long
discussion of alternatives, and EDTF was a leading candidate:
http://www.loc.gov/standards/datetime/
IIRC, the pending items when discussion tapered off in CSL were the
selection of a subset of the EDTF forms, and the drafting of a parser
(from the LoC page, it looks like .NET, Ruby and C# implementations
are now available. Don't know if there is anything for JavaScript or
Haskell.
If CSL adopts a specific input format, and someone writes a parser and
a test suite for it, I would be happy to include it in citeproc-js.
FB
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 5:17 AM, Sebastian Karcher
<karc...@u.northwestern.edu> wrote:
> He's around here -- lets see if he implemented this specifically or was also
> following a legacy format.
> Given how many different places now use citerproc-js, switching is going to
> be hard, but also allowing ISO might be an option.
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Martin Fenner <m...@martinfenner.org> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, citeproc-js. Should I convince Frank Bennett then?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> Am 08.06.2015 um 20:40 schrieb Sebastian Karcher
>> <karc...@u.northwestern.edu>:
>>
>> This is a citeproc-js question, right? CSL doesn't have any specified
>> input date format.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Martin Fenner <m...@martinfenner.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear list,
>>>
>>> while the way CSL handles date information works really well, e.g. for
>>> partial dates, I would like to understand why ISO 8601 (the datetime
>>> standard) wasn’t choosen for this. ISO 8601 handles both partial dates, e.g.
>>> „2006“ or „2006-11“ and date ranges, e.g. „2006-11-01/2006-11-15“, the only
>>> limitation are cases such as quarters, etc.
>>>
>>> I admit that the reason I bring this up is edge cases currently not
>>> reflected in citation styles (e.g. including hours and minutes), but
>>> handling of dates in ISO 8601 format also seems to be easier, given the wide
>>> support in languages and frameworks. Is it mostly „why change something that
>>> works now“, or are there are other arguments that I have missed. Happy to
>>> read up earlier messages on this topic if you provide a link.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xbiblio-devel mailing list
>>> xbiblio-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Karcher, PhD
>> Department of Political Science
>> Northwestern University
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> xbiblio-devel mailing list
>> xbiblio-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xbiblio-devel mailing list
>> xbiblio-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sebastian Karcher, PhD
> Department of Political Science
> Northwestern University
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> xbiblio-devel mailing list
> xbiblio-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
xbiblio-devel mailing list
xbiblio-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
