3 ms·
Yes! That's a very good point! How is a data-formatting mini-language supposed to sensibly deal with this? RFC3339 specifically prohibits the idea of unknown
by geocar 8y ago
Yes! That's a very good point!
How is a data-formatting mini-language supposed to sensibly deal with this?
RFC3339 specifically prohibits the idea of unknown dates/months...
- acdha 8y agoThere are proposed extensions — for example, the Library of Congress[1] has proposed "X" for unknown field values and ".." for when only one part of a range is known: https://www.loc.gov/standards/datetime/edtf.html https://www.loc.gov/standards/datetime/edtf.html 1. Disclaimer: my employer but I don't work in that group or on that project
- geocar 8y agoThanks for that. I think this begs for a better "date" object though, rather than an advocate for the programmable formatter, no?
- Zardoz84 8y agooh man... I found these kind of dates dealing with MARC21 records. It's a problem as enforces us to duplicate data and use some complex replaces on SQL when we need to do queries by date.