RE: AW: ISO 8601 anyone?? And more on Parties.

[John McClure <hypergrove@olympus.net>]

The presentation text for an item is as much a 'data element' as is an
8601-formatted string, and that is the definition of a core component as
given by the CC Naming document. I hear you that specific syntax is not on
the table, but sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. My point Mike
was that issues of regional differences in presentation are separable from
whether there is an 8601 string in the datastream or not.

Thanks,
John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Rawlins [mailto:rawlins@metronet.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 11:23 AM
> To: ebXML core
> Subject: Re: AW: ISO 8601 anyone?? And more on Parties.
>
>
> Excuse me if this is a dumb question, but what does this
> discussion have to do
> with "syntax neutral" core components?  I don't see any relevance
> other than to
> settle whether or not the dates/times referenced as Core
> Components always need
> to be in a specific format.  The ebXML Requirements Spec doesn't
> mandate ISO
> 8601 specifically, but it does implicitly by mandating the use of
> appropriate,
> existing international standards.
>
> Whether dates are presented as elements or attributes in an
> instance document,
> and whether or not they also have presentation formats, seem to me to be
> implementation issues that might be relevant for other efforts
> (EWG, X12, OAG,
> etc.), but not for ebXML.
>
> John McClure wrote:
>
> > Again, I think that both encodings -- a presentation encoding
> and an 8601
> > encoding -- are necessary. What's the problem with
> >
> > <instant value='2001-01-01'>New Year's Day</instant>
> > <instant value='2001-10-03T14:00'>03 Oct 01 2PM</instant>
> > <instant value='2001-10-03'>Oct. 3, 2001</instant>
> >
> > If a publisher wants to put the 8601 string into the content
> then, by all
> > means, let them. Don't force 'my way or the highway' (as
> Frankie would say).
> > That's not how standards are developed. Gather requirements. Meet the
> > requirements. I daresay that the requirements include what I have just
> > outlined.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ian Galpin [mailto:g1smd@freeuk.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 7:59 PM
> > > To: ebXML core
> > > Cc: Andreas Schultz; Aron Roberts
> > > Subject: Re: AW: ISO 8601 anyone?? And more on Parties.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2001-Apr-17 Andreas Schultz <Schultz.DKV@t-online.de> wrote in
> > > <ebXML-core>:
> > >
> > >
> > > > I also agree with what Sharon said about the CONTENT. But - the
> > > possibility
> > > > we have within EDIFACT allows people to write Date -
> > > information in a format
> > > > they are used to. Limiting this to just one format, even if it
> > > may (or may
> > > > not as Eduardo points out) be stated by W3C (who as we at
> least since
> > > > Washington all know does not have the same status as UN/CEFACT
> > > EWG or ISO)
> > > > seems to be a poor solution. I would not expect the Europeans
> > > (mostly using
> > > > DDMMYYYY)to change the format they are used to, especially not while
> > > > exchangig data within Europe.
> > >
> > >
> > > Under CEN regulations, all European and Scandinavian
> countries have now
> > > adopted the EN 28601 standard, which has the same words as
> ISO 8601. It
> > > should not be a problem to use Year-Month-Day across the
> whole of Europe.
> > > Lets get rid of the dd/mm/yy - mm/dd/yy ambiguity for ever.
> Although W3C
> > > does not have the status of ISO, many W3C recommendations
> incorporate the
> > > ideas from common ISO standards.. ISO 8601, ISO 3166, ISO
> 4217, ISO 8859,
> > > ISO 10646 and so on. In Germany, DIN (the German standards authority)
> > > revised the DIN 5008 standard in 1996 to outlaw the old '20
> VIII 97' date
> > > format in favour of '1997-08-20'  a la ISO 8601 & EN 28601
> standards. DIN
> > > 5008 is the standard for typographical date formats, used in letters,
> > > contracts, invoices, publications, and so on, in Germany. It
> has no ISO or
> > > EN equivalent (yet!).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > So, I guess the solution only can be to give
> > > > informations about the format a date is expressed in (even if this
> > > > is not compliant to W3C or ISO 8601 but at "least" with UN/EDIFACT).
> > >
> > > Let's use just one format, end-to-end, in the whole process.
> > > Avoids confusion, needs less processing.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  Cheers,
> > >
> > >
> > >  Ian A.N. Galpin.
> > >
> > >          *Sadly my middle two initials don't repeat, but
> > >          *my first three initials do spell my first name ;->
> > >
> > >
> > > <g1smd@freeuk.com>
> > >
> > >
> > > [2001-04-18]
> > >
> > > .end
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> > > "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-core-request@lists.ebxml.org
> > >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> > "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-core-request@lists.ebxml.org
>
> --
> Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting
> http://www.metronet.com/~rawlins/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-core-request@lists.ebxml.org
>