• 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 12:41:02 -0400
• In-reply-to: <03e101c21166$7bd50690$32f5d90c@C1980223A>
• References: <8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E06621CC2@r...>

At 11:38 AM 6/11/2002 -0500, Jeff Rafter wrote:
>There were arguments against the date types before and after the rec was
>released (myself included). At the time, I think the argument was that ISO
>8601 was the only thing that claimed to be an international date standard
>(though most people understand international in this case  = western). Is
>there a better date format that is widely used that would have been better?
>XML Schema could have created a whole new type-- but I think that would have
>garnered even more resistance.

I'd have emphasized and supported local understandings of dates rather than 
enforcing a particular notation.  That runs counter to the "we will decide, 
you will use" approach of XSD, of course.

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

• References:
  • RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: "Jeff Rafter" <jeffrafter@d...>

• 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