2188 2005-09-14 18:52:09 +0000 R-195: Correct error in the description of order for dateTime 2009-04-21 19:21:35 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Datatypes: XSD Part 2 unspecified All All CLOSED WONTFIX resolved P2 normal --- 1 sandygao cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 6198 0 sandygao 2005-09-14 18:52:09 +0000 This was formerly RQ-124. The current description of order relation on dateTime says "A. Normalize P and Q. That is, if there is a timezone present and it is not Z....' This is incorrect; values are either timezoned or not, but they don't carry with them the information of which timezone was indicated by the original lexical representation. For dateTime, the timezone of a timezoned value is an artifact of the lexical representation, not of the value. The order is defined on the value space. See (member-only link) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Oct/0258.html 6199 1 sandygao 2005-09-14 18:52:18 +0000 See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2003AprJun/0020.html 7185 2 davep 2005-11-15 00:42:24 +0000 (In reply to comment #0) > This was formerly RQ-124. > > The current description of order relation on dateTime says "A. Normalize P and > Q. That is, if there is a timezone present and it is not Z....' This is > incorrect; values are either timezoned or not, but they don't carry with them > the information of which timezone was indicated by the original lexical > representation. For dateTime, the timezone of a timezoned value is an artifact > of the lexical representation, not of the value. The order is defined on the > value space. > > See (member-only link) > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Oct/0258.html Back in 2002 this made sense for 1.1. But it's OBE given the change to incorporate timezone information in the values, and to remove leap seconds. As far as 1.1 is concerned, this bug has been a non-issue for a long time. Recommend it be classified as for 1.0 only. 11915 3 cmsmcq 2006-09-21 00:00:29 +0000 At the face to face meeting of January 2006 in St. Petersburg, the Working Group decided not to take further action on this issue in XML Schema 1.1. (This issue was not discussed separately; it was one of those which were dispatched by a blanket decision that all other open issues would be closed without action, unless raised again in last-call comments.) Some members of the Working Group expressed regret over not being able to resolve all the issues dealt with in this way, but on the whole the Working Group felt it better not to delay Datatypes 1.1 in order to resolve all of them. This issue should have been marked as RESOLVED /WONTFIX at that time, but apparently was not. I am marking it that way now, to reduce confusion.