[whatwg] Parsing RFC3339 constructs
ian at hixie.ch
Mon Aug 10 16:47:59 PDT 2009
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Asbjørn Ulsberg wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:59:11 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
> >> - the literal letters T and Z must be uppercase
> > Any technical reason why they have to?
> Any reason why they don't?
It simplifies processing a tiny amount.
> > It would help people understand what the difference to RFC 3339 is.
> Indeed, and this is exactly what we did in RFC 4287, as I've pointed out
> previously. And I can't say that date parsing has proven to be an issue
> there at all, even with the little work we did on narrowing down and
> tightening the syntax. Section 3.3. of RFC 4287 says:
> A Date construct is an element whose content MUST conform
> to the "date-time" production in [RFC3339]. In addition,
> an uppercase "T" character MUST be used to separate date
> and time, and an uppercase "Z" character MUST be present
> in the absence of a numeric time zone offset.
> Perhaps HTML5 needs more detailing than this for parsing, but not
> referencing RFC 3339 just for the sake of not referencing RFC 3339
> doesn't make much sense imho.
> For authoring (and parsing, infact), RFC 3339 plus a couple of
> additional guidelines have proven to be enough for implementors of RFC
> 4287, so assume HTML5 could be better off doing the same, no?
HTML5 now references ISO8601 directly in a non-normative note explaining
why ISO8601 isn't referenced normatively.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg