[osis-core] div type="date"

Todd Tillinghast osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
Wed, 28 May 2003 17:10:04 -0600


See below.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: osis-core-admin@bibletechnologieswg.org [mailto:osis-core-
> admin@bibletechnologieswg.org] On Behalf Of Chris Little
> Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2003 8:17 AM
> To: osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
> Subject: Re: [osis-core] div type="date"
> 
> Patrick,
> 
> On Sat, 24 May 2003, Patrick Durusau wrote:
> 
> > AM/PM works across Christian traditions, might want to have
alternatives
> > available for before or after sunrise/sunset for Jewish traditions.
> 
> sunrise/sunset sorts incorrectly, but the BCE years already break
this, so
> it seems somewhat secondary.  We could pretend "AM/PM" represent
> ante-/post-median rather than meridian.
> 
> > Don't know that we need BCE dates. For recording time/calendar of
say
> > medieval prayer book, they probably don't use AM/PM time, we have
modern
> > equivalents but that is not what you want to encode as part of the
> > original text.
> 
> BCE is important for timelines, e.g. encoding Bishop Ussher's timeline
> from 4004 BCE.
> 
> Vigils, Matins, Lauds, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers, & Compline are the
> medieval prayer times.  Lauds/Vespers would probably be more precise
for
> both Sunrise/Sunset and AM/PM, but since no one knows those, I'm not
> recommending them.

What would this look like?  (01.01.Sunrise and 01.01.Sunset)?

> 
> 
> > >I don't think there's any good reason to constrain people to a
> particular
> > >calendar or even to request them to state the calendar they use.
> > >
> > >
> > Could simply say this is how to do date/time for texts that are
bound to
> > a particular time. Best Practice. If you do something else, well you
> > better say what it is in order for other people to use it. (Another
best
> > practice.)
> 
> This sounds good to me.
> 
> 
> One issue I forgot to mention is the practice, with ISO dates of
starting
> the hour with capital T to mark the transition from date to time,
which we
> could also adopt, e.g. CE.2003.05.24.T09.14 .  If we're doing a work
keyed
> to times only, it helps us figure out that T09.14 refers to HH.mm
rahter
> than MM.DD.

I agree, we should use "T" to indicate the start of a time.

> 
> 
> --Chris

Todd