• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:50:53 -0400
• In-reply-to: <200206111639.MAA14956@m...>
• References: <4.2.0.58.20020611123702.01ec0010@p...>

At 12:40 PM 6/11/2002 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
>Simon St.Laurent scripsit:
>
> > I think I'm even less happy about your attribute annotation approach.  It
> > makes it look like we actually have a clue, when in fact we rarely 
> do.  Why
> > not specify a timezone while we're at it?  Oh, right, those only appeared
> > around 1850.
>
>Because the gDate datatype covers only dates, not subdivisions thereof.

I think we're stuck between "date" and "gDay" here.  I saw the "g" and 
those types support timezones.

There's no such thing as a gDate, which is kind of funny, since I might 
just want to compare dates with timezones at some point in my career.

Damned with a timezone, damned without.

Simon St.Laurent
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Data binding as type definition
• Next by Date: Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Previous by thread: Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Next by thread: Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread