Re: [netmod] IETF WG state changed for draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6991-bis

[Jürgen Schönwälder <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 03:30:32PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
> 
> Here's what is intuitive to me:
> 
> 	- date		YYYY-MM-DD
> 	- time		hh:mm:ss
> 
> Effectively your proposal.  I question if "date-with-zone" or "time-with-zone" are ever needed.    Certainly not "date-with-zone", as there is no way to reason about it.  As for "time-with-zone", I'm suspicious, as I've never seen it disconnected from a "date" before.
>

This is what xsd:date and xsd:time do, see section 3.2.8 and 2.3.9 of
<https://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/> and the intention was to provide
a type that is compatible with the XSD definitions. I guess W3C also
surprises their users. ;-)

I will change the names and we need to answer the question whether we
want to provide in addition types that are compatible with the XSD
types or not.

/js

PS: The reason for date-with-zone is that it specifies an unambiguous
    24 hour interval. If you state the deadline is 2022-04-08, then
    this means different things in different time zones. If you write
    2022-04-08Z, then this ambiguity goes away. Perhaps nobody does
    this in the real world because people are prepared to deal with
    the ambiguity somehow but I can see reasons why XSD people went
    this way.

-- 
Jürgen Schönwälder              Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>