RE: datetime - was -> RE: status of wg specifications

It's already in the PIDF draft.  I thought the conclusion before was that
datetime should change too if there was still the opportunity to change it.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Graham Klyne [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 8:36 AM
> To: Carr, Wayne
> Cc: '[email protected]'; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: datetime - was -> RE: status of wg specifications
> 
> 
> We discussed this a short while ago, without clear 
> conclusion.  datetime is 
> being used in specifications other than CPIM.
> 
> Whatever the outcome for the datetime draft, I think it would 
> be sensible 
> for the PIDF draft to specify/emphasize that "T" and "Z" in 
> datetime values 
> must be restricted to upper case.  I believe this will be 
> covered in the 
> latest PIDF draft.
> 
> #g
> --
> 
> At 07:56 AM 5/14/02 -0700, Carr, Wayne wrote:
> >In DATETIME, there was the problem that it allowed use of 
> either 'T' or 't'
> >and 'Z' or 'z'.  That makes it incompatible with the XML 
> Schema dateTime.
> >Removing one sentence in the ID is all that it would take to 
> make it so only
> >'T' and 'Z' is allowed.
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------
> Graham Klyne
> <[email protected]>
> 


  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]