[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: T2: Use of UTC for Timestamp not mandated.
Agreed, I believe that this issue was raised a while back (before we wrapped things up) where he suggested that the spec REQUIRE the use of the canonical represntation of timeInstant (now dateTime). I thought we had adopted this, but I see that the spec doesn't reflect this requirement. I don't recall if there was any opposition. Barring any research back to the previous drafts of the XMLSchema specification, I would recommend that we adopt an errata that both updates the ebXML MS specification to conform with the now W3C Recommendation for XMLSchema [1] as well as adopts the proposal that all dateTime elements be required to be expressed using the canonical representation of dateTime as defined in section 3.2.7.2 of [1]. Further, since the canonical representation may omit the timezone, its absence SHALL be interpreted as inferring UTC. Therefore, I would propose that the following change/errata be adopted. [802] The REQUIRED Timestamp element is a value representing the time that the message was created. It SHALL be expressed as a canonical representation of the dateTime datatype as defined in section 3.2.7.2 of [XMLSchema-2]. Absence of the "Z" timezone qualification for Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) SHALL be inferred as meaning UTC. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dateTime Cheers, Chris "Cherian, Sanjay" wrote: > > Hi, > > These are the places in the specification where <TimeStamp/> appears: > 8.4.6.2, 8.5.2.3, 8.6.1, 8.13.2 and 8.14.1. > One of the descriptions has been included below for reference: > > [Line 801] 8.4.6.2 Timestamp element > [Line 802] The REQUIRED Timestamp is a value representing the time that > the message header was created > [Line 803] conforming to an [XMLSchema] timeInstant. > > This statement does not mandate that UTC be used when date and time is > specified with <Timestamp/>. On the other > hand, there is no facility in the CPP to define the time zone that one party > operates within and no facility in the CPA > to capture the timezone that two parties must agree upon. > > The use of UTC is suggested through all the examples in the specification > that use <Timestamp/>. For example: > > [Line 953] <eb:Timestamp>2000-07-25T12:19:05Z</eb:Timestamp> > > I understand that the Z at the end indicates that the time specified here is > relative to UTC (the same as GMT). > > In my opinion, it is a small matter to require the use of UTC in the ebMS > specification. > > Thanks, > Sanjay J. Cherian > Software Architect > Sterling Commerce > Irving, TX > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word > "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-msg-request@lists.oasis-open.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC