Re: Date/time tag??

eostrom@fiicmds04.tu-graz.ac.at (Erik Ostrom)

Mail folder: WWW Talk Jul-Oct 1993
Next message: David C. Martin: "Re: yet another tag "
Previous message: Tony Sanders: "Re: Date/time tag?? "
In-reply-to: Tony Sanders: "Re: Date/time tag?? "
Reply: Marc VanHeyningen: "Re: Date/time tag?? "

From: eostrom@fiicmds04.tu-graz.ac.at (Erik Ostrom)
Message-id: <9308021726.AA09597@iicm.tu-graz.ac.at>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 93 18:26:39 +0100
To: sanders@bsdi.com
Cc: www-talk@nxoc01.cern.ch
In-reply-to: <9308021706.AA29682@austin.BSDI.COM> (message from Tony Sanders on Mon, 02 Aug 1993 12:06:51 -0500)
Subject: Re: Date/time tag??
Status: RO

  > Could I suggest the following form for within documents ?
  >
  > <date normalised="1993-05-01T15:30:00">May 1, 1993</date>

  If we must have something inside the document (which I don't think we should)
  then it should be in the same format as the Date: and Last-Modified: headers
  in HTTP/1.0 (these fields are defined per RFC850 but must be GMT).

I get the impression this suggestion is not for "the date of the document"
(which I agree should not be inside the document) but for "how to include
dates in documents in such a way that they're mechanically recognizable as
dates" (which I think would be a useful type of semantic markup).

I agree that date representation should be kept consistent (for the
"normalised" version, although we'd be better off coming up with a name for
that attribute that's spelled the same in English and American), and also like
the idea of allowing a suggested textual presentation.

I can't make up my mind whether or not usage like

   I was thinking <date normalised="Sun, 01 Aug 1993 20:21:22 +0100">last
   night</date> that it might be a good idea to be able to do this.

would be cool or should be discouraged.  I have no coherent comments on this,
just wanted to bring it up.

  --sanders

--Erik