ISSUE-63: How to treat underspecified dates in DCAT?
DCATfuzzyDate
How to treat underspecified dates in DCAT?
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- DCAT
- Raised by:
- Richard Cyganiak
- Opened on:
- 2013-04-12
- Description:
- DCAT recommends that dates with unknown month or day be written as 2005-01-01. We got a Last Call comment on this:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-comments/2013Apr/0008.html
Stasinos reminded us of his earlier proposals for handling this:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2012Jan/0094.html - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- ISSUE-63 (DCATfuzzyDate): How to treat underspecified dates in DCAT? (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2013-04-12)
Related notes:
PhilA made the excellent argument in [1] that (to paraphrase) DCAT should enable providers to specify dates to the appropriate level of precision, and that to "force" providers to use xsd:date (or indeed xsd:dateTime) potentially forces a higher level of precision on the asserted date than actually may be appropriate.
I like PhilA's suggestion that we include the following language: "rdfs:Literal using the relevant ISO 8601 Date and Time compliant string and typed using the appropriate XML Schema datatype [[XMLSCHEMA-2]]"
Are there counter-arguments?
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-comments/2013Apr/0008.html
implemented:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-comments/2013May/0023.html
Display change log
