andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk
Tue Mar 10 13:00:08 PDT 2009
In message <20090309215532.GA3201 at stripey.com>, Smylers
<Smylers at stripey.com> writes
>Tom Duhamel writes:
>> My opinion is that all the following dates are precise:
>> The later is more precise, but the three are all precise in my
>Being precise means having a small granularity. Obviously that's
>subjective, but in many cases granularity of a year would be deemed
I take it you're not a geologist? ;-)
If I wish to compare my earnings, or the average daily rainfall, or
somesuch, for 2007 and 2008, then the four-figure "yyyy" value is as
precise as it is possible to be; anything with higher granularity would
introduce bogus precision.
>> There are numerous reason to use dates which are not very precise, but are
>> still precise nevertheless. I'm going to release the new version of my
>> current project in <time datetime="2009-04">April</time> but I cannot tell
>> as of now the exact day of the release.
>Indeed, that's a reason to use an imprecise date in that paragraph of
>text. But it isn't apparently why that date needs to be marked up as
>such; what consumers of the above HTML would do something useful with
I again refer readers to the use-cases I posted recently - including
searching, sorting and visual display.
More information about the whatwg