[DFDL-WG] More Date/Time/DateTime Clarifications
Steve Lawrence
slawrence at tresys.com
Fri Apr 12 16:02:33 EDT 2013
We need a couple more clarifications on implementing date/time/dateTime
in Daffodil.
1) What is the expected infoset output? The spec seems to be silent on
this issue. Based on some tests we received from IBM, it looks like this
makes sense:
xs:date = uuuu-MM-ddxxx
xs:time = HH:mm:ss.SSSSSSxxx
xs:dateTime = uuuu-MM-dd'T'HH:mm:ss.SSSSSSxxx
Points of interest:
- uuuu instead of yyyy. The u allows for negative years, which is needed
to represent BC dates
- There are 6 significant figures for fractional seconds
- Timezone is represented as xxx, since UTC is represented as +00:00
instead of 'Z' in the IBM tests we have
Does this seem correct?
2) We would like some confirmation on the patterns for
calendarPatternKind="implicit"?
The current spec has:
xs:date = yyyy-MM-dd
xs:time = HH:mm:ssZZZ
xs:dateTime = yyyy-MM-dd'T'HH:mm:ss
The IBM tests we have match these patterns except for the timezone
pattern for xs:time. The ZZZ pattern matches -0800, however, the IBM
test we have parse -08:00. This could be represented with a few
different patterns (e.g. ZZZZZ, XXX, xxx, xxxxx). We're unsure if the
IBM tests are incorrect of if the spec needs to be updated.
It also seems odd to me that the xs:time pattern has a timezone whereas
dateTime does not. I'm not arguing it's wrong, just that it's not
intuitive to me.
Note that we don't have IBM's tool set up yet, so we can't verify if the
tests we have actually represent IBM behavior.
Thanks,
- Steve
More information about the dfdl-wg
mailing list