[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: limits of the generic

• To: "Jeni Tennison" <jeni@j...>,"John Cowan" <jcowan@r...>
• Subject: Re: limits of the generic
• From: "Jeff Greif" <jgreif@a...>
• Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 11:35:28 -0700
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• References: <200209282248.SAA07986@m...> <170201240678.20020929000004@j...>

Another astonishment is that the algorithm described makes
P1Y1D > P365D indeterminate, even though in our naive understanding, even
including the idea of leap year, a year and a day is always at least 366
days.
Jeff


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeni Tennison" <jeni@j...>
To: "John Cowan" <jcowan@r...>
Cc: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>; <uche.ogbuji@f...>;
"Jonathan Robie" <jonathan.robie@d...>;
<xml-dev@l...>
Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 4:00 PM
Subject: Re:  limits of the generic


> John,
>
> >> The algorithm in the W3C XML Schema Datatypes Recommendation adds
> >> the year/month component first (which would give 2005-02-29), then
> >> "pins" the result of that to give a legal date (i.e. 2005-02-28),
> >> and then adds the day and time components of the duration (to give
> >> the final answer of 2005-03-01).
> >
> > Which Astonishes me (as in Principle of Least Astonishment). I would
> > have expected a year after 2-29 to be 3-1.
>
> Well, as you know, there's lots Astonishing about W3C XML Schema.
> Perhaps my problem is that I'm no longer so Astonished by W3C XML
> Schema and that makes me Astonished by XPath 2.0...

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: limits of the generic
    • From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>

• References:
  • Re: limits of the generic
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
  • Re: limits of the generic
    • From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>

• Prev by Date: Re: limits of the generic
• Next by Date: Re: Timezones (was: limits of the generic)
• Previous by thread: Re: limits of the generic
• Next by thread: Re: limits of the generic
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread