[tei-council] what to do with dating attributes -- VOTE!

[James Cummings]

Syd Bauman wrote:
> Issue: name of main dating attr (date= vs value=)
> Solution: leave 'em as is
> Vote:
> 
>      _X_ I have considered issue, and agree with proposed solution
> 
> 
> Issue: classes -- @dur and @value in same or different attr classes?
> Solution: split 'em into separate classes
> Vote:
> 
>      _X_ I have considered issue, and agree with proposed solution
> 
> Issue: keep <distance>?
> Solution: nuke it
> Vote:
>      _X_ I have considered issue, and disagree with proposed solution

I think this conversation is misplaced in a conversation otherwise solely about 
date/time since distance is used spatially as well as temporally.

> 
> Issue: keep precision= of <date>
> Solution: nuke it
> Vote:
> 
>      _X_ I have considered issue, and agree with proposed solution
> 
> Issue: method of expressing known day & month, unknown year, or
>        specific possible dates within a range
> Suggestion: defer to P5 1.x.
> Vote:
> 
>      _X_ I have considered issue, and agree with proposed solution

Though I never had my comments in my message from 2007-02-05 explained viz. 
whether W3C gMonthDay datatype allows --25-12 for christmas.

> 
> Issue: constraint of date-regularization attributes: W3C, ISO, other
> Suggestions:
> Vote:
> 
>          I have considered issue, and agree with proposed solution:
>      _X_ A
>      _x_ D

I'd vote for A, with possibly a secondary vote for D, but I find both solutions 
less than elegant.

>          I have considered issue, and disagree with proposed solution:
>      _X_ B
>      _X_ C

-James

-- 
Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford
James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk