Charles Iliya Krempeaux
supercanadian at gmail.com
Mon Oct 31 22:59:48 PST 2005
On 10/31/05, David Janes -- BlogMatrix <davidjanes at blogmatrix.com> wrote:
> I've been mucking about with the datetime-design-pattern page . If
> you have a pretty good idea what the final consensus opinion for the
> exact format, can you please add it in.
> I've also added sections for "date", "time" and "duration" variants,
> which I've noticed are poping up in other areas of discussion.
> Regards, etc...
>  http://microformats.org/wiki/datetime-design-pattern
I skimmed the document, and it seems to imply that dates should always
be encoded in YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss±ZZZZ format.
(Not sure if this has come up before, but) why not let the format be
specified in the class attribute? (With the default being iso8601.)
<abbr class="foo iso8601" title="20051031T23:01:31+0200">Halloween
at 11:00:31 PM</abbr>
<abbr class="foo rfc2822" title="Thu, 21 Dec 2000 16:01:07
(Or maybe something like urn:rfc:2822 and urn:iso:8601 would be better.)
Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
charles @ reptile.ca
supercanadian @ gmail.com
developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
Never forget where you came from
More information about the microformats-discuss