This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 14908 - It's not clear to me if the "if the time-zone offset is not zero" clause here affects authoring conformance or not. FWIW, validator.nu treats <input type=datetime value=0001-01-01T00:00:00-00:00> as valid. Also, the term "best representation of the global
Summary: It's not clear to me if the "if the time-zone offset is not zero" clause here...
Status: RESOLVED NEEDSINFO
Alias: None
Product: WHATWG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: HTML (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: Unsorted
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: contributor
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-11-23 08:11 UTC by contributor
Modified: 2012-07-18 18:39 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description contributor 2011-11-23 08:11:33 UTC 
Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/common-microsyntaxes.html
Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#dates-and-times
Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#dates-and-times

Comment:
It's not clear to me if the "if the time-zone offset is not zero" clause here
affects authoring conformance or not. FWIW, validator.nu treats <input
type=datetime value=0001-01-01T00:00:00-00:00> as valid. Also, the term "best
representation of the global date and time string" doesn't seem to be used
anywhere in the spec.

Posted from: 114.43.120.123 by kennyluck@csail.mit.edu
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:8.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/8.0
Comment 1 Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu 2011-11-23 08:18:02 UTC 
Please use the pointer http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/common-microsyntaxes.html#valid-time-zone-offset-string for the first part of the comment instead. Sorry about walking away for the second part of the comment.
Comment 2 Michael[tm] Smith 2011-11-23 08:47:45 UTC 
(In reply to comment #0)
> FWIW, validator.nu treats <input
> type=datetime value=0001-01-01T00:00:00-00:00> as valid.

That may not indicate anything other than validator.nu not being completely conformant to the spec with regard to this, or at least not being up to date with current spec. I'm not saying either way -- just that the behavior would need to be checked against the spec.
Comment 3 Michael[tm] Smith 2011-11-23 08:54:01 UTC 
OK, after looking at the spec, the definition of "valid time-zone offset string" at http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/common-microsyntaxes.html#valid-time-zone-offset-string is definitely stating document-conformance requirements.

So if validator.nu is not checking those requirements correctly, we need to fix it.
Comment 4 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2011-12-07 23:49:06 UTC 
I'm confused about what this bug is requesting or asking. Can someone clarify for me what the question or bug is here?
Comment 5 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2011-12-09 22:22:07 UTC 
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Did Not Understand Request
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: see comment 4