- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:08:29 +0100
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Hi Graham, This issue was closed, pending review. Are you satisfied with the changes? Can we close it? Alternatively, you can reopen it, or create a more specific issue. Thanks, Luc PS See note on this issue's page On 29/07/11 10:03, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > PROV-ISSUE-58 (time-iso8601): is reference to iso8601 appropriate? [Conceptual Model] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/58 > > Raised by: Graham Klyne > On product: Conceptual Model > > > [[ > Time is defined according to [ISO8601]. > ]] > > I don't think it is appropriate of an open standard to be normatively > dependent on a standard that is available only on payment of a charge > for access. In this case, we could make reference to the XML scheme > datatypes, which would also require us to think about my next point... > > As far as I'm aware, ISO 8601 covers both points in time and time > intervals. As such a bare reference to ISO 86012 is not really an > adequate definition: which do we want? I suspect > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dateTime. > > > > >
Received on Monday, 22 August 2011 21:09:08 UTC