ISO 8601 anyone?? And more on Parties.

["Smith, Neal L. (NLSM)" <NLSM@chevron.com>]

William J. Kammerer writes:

>The nice thing about the W3C schema is that it has forced some basic
>data types onto people, such as the ones I mentioned yesterday (date,
>time, dateTime, and duration), with fairly tight constraints on how they
>are to be used.   In effect, W3C has made some basic core components.
>These "rules" can be  somewhat liberating, in that they eliminate
>decision making - an aspect of "standards" that is fairly underrated.
>The extended dateTime format imposed by XML Schema -
>2000-03-04T23:00:00 - is not especially superior or inferior to the
>alternatives, like the ISO 8601 basic format 20000304T230000;  but
>having chosen one, I feel very comfortable with the authors' decision.

I agree with William.  W3C Schema specifies a robust set of datatypes for
date and time, which is compatible with ISO 8601.  There is simply no reason
for ebXml to consider this issue - use the data and time formats allowed in
W3C Schema. 

Neal Smith
Chevron