Re: [dita] Previous discussion of/decision on generic date/time markup?

[Don R Day <donrday@contelligencegroup.com>]

I recall a topic on recommending the use of ISO conventions for textual markup in lieu of datatyped enforcement. Darned if I can find it now. However, our early documentation for date-dependent attributes seems to rely on that presumed convention. For example, see the attribute descriptions for @modified, @golive, and @expiry in the <revised> element from the 1.0 spec:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.0/langspec/revised.html

The closest to any domain that might be worth using as a model would be the bookchangehistory element's content (ie, <reviewed> or <approved>):
http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.1/OS/langspec/langref/bookchangehistory.html

In general, the bookmeta designs for structured data tend to be over-prescriptive for authoring in a regular XML editor that lacks form-based affordances for such constructs. On the other hand, the template-based or guideline-based input from 1.0 days was not always localization friendly or verifiable. Fun.

I'm not sure if these were the same background you recall.
--
Don

On 8/21/2013 2:50 PM, Eliot Kimber wrote:

I dimly recall some discussion in the past of generic markup for dates and
times, but I don't remember the details, other than nobody proposed a
generic date and time markup domain.

Unfortunately, it's not possible to search usefully on keywords like the
"date" and "time" and "markup" so my attempt to search the mail archives was
a failure.

Does anyone have any memory of this discussion?

Thanks,

Eliot

--

• Don R. Day
• Co-Founder, ContelligenceGroup.com
• Co-Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
• LinkedIn: donrday   Twitter: @donrday
• About.me: Don R. Day   Skype: don.r.day

• "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
• Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
• --T.S. Eliot