[microformats-discuss] re: Microformat for timestamp of updated content

[brian suda]

If you look at the W3C note about date time
http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime
and information about the iCal/hCal date time stamps, you will notice
that a full UTC date time stamp is valid, so it would look something
like the following:

<abbr title="20050816T170200Z">5:02 p.m. EDT (21:02 GMT), August 16,
2005</abbr>

Here is the Wiki page about datetime formats
http://microformats.org/wiki/datetime-design-pattern

There was some older discussion on this list about the ISO time stamp
and acceptable formats for hCalendar.

-brian

Bryan J Busch wrote:

>From: Robert Bachmann <rbach at rbach.priv.at>
>
>  
>
>><p>
>>Last update:
>><abbr class="page-last-modified" title="20050102">2 Jan 2005</abbr>
>> </p>
>>    
>>
>
>I like the way this one is shaping up. Can I assume at this point that
>we've gotten rid of the surrounding tags and are going with just the
><abbr ... </abbr> piece? That would certainly make it more micro.
>
>One addition: can we add the time, as well? That way, CNN (for
>example) could use our microformat on its home page when displaying
>something like:
>
>Updated: 5:02 p.m. EDT (21:02 GMT), August 16, 2005
>_______________________________________________
>microformats-discuss mailing list
>microformats-discuss at microformats.org
>http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
>
>  
>