+1, a vast majority of web pages do not depend on high frequency updates and 
date is sufficient.  This implies datetime is just extra decimal places.  A 
float is just an integer with decimal point and added zeros. 



----- Original Message -----
From: Arthur Clifford <[email protected]>
To: Gannon Dick <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2011 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: Regarding HTML5 <time>

I think the problem is more one of figuring out what HTML is supposed to be?

Is HTML supposed to be a markup language for presentation? Is it supposed to 
mark up document structure semantically? Is it supposed to mark up content 
structure?

The answer to those questions cannot all be yes and the time vs data tag 
discussion is an example of why.

If HTML was just about marking up content to tell a browser how to display 
something then time as a tag may be irrelevant to that. The original content 
would likely be built in XML or obtained from a DB and transformed into some 
meaningful output; thus the unix timestamp in a mysql database could become a 
pretty formatted date or time for human consumption. But, it would lose all 
semantic meaning it would just be text in a document. All server-side languages 
worth working with have support for converting date formats so that would be a 
trivial operation to perform server-side. The consequence of saying that HTML 
is just for marking up content for display though is it runs competly counter 
to the industry expectation that content and its face should be separated and 
CSS not HTML should dictate presentation. However, the still extant <b> and <i> 
tags, along with table tags and other layout/formatting tags suggest that html 
hasn't shaken its roots as a rich
 text markup language. Not long ago someone ranted here about people getting 
ridiculously CSS happy and bloating a page with syntax. While it  is true that 
not everybody will do that, it is an industry trend to think it is wrong to 
treat html like a rich text markup language as it once was. So the ranting 
gentleman's views are completely warranted from the classic expectations of 
html.

If HTML is for marking up a document structure semantically then time as a tag 
is a good way to markup something semantically (at least in english). As others 
said it would tell readers what to do with it. The anglo-centric view of what 
time should represent is also short-sighted. Time is one of those complicated 
data structure items that have many different manifestations depending where 
you are in the world. A time tag done right would be able to render time in a 
culturo-temporal specific way. Length So that a time in UTC could be 
transformed to local time and local calendar and displayed in a way that is 
relevant to the viewer. And readers could do the same thing. If the time tag 
had a src format then it can be rendered however. Since the WC3 has a datetime 
specification its not like we're asking anybody to reinvent the wheel. However, 
is HTML supposed to markup data structures or is it supposed to markup 
layout/formatting?

If HTML is supposed to mark up content structure then it would be completely 
lacking if it didn't have support for a time data type as well as int, float, 
and other standard core types found in most programming languages. However, it 
would also be necessary to extend the model for complex data types people would 
create. If you want an extensible data structure markup language with semantic 
tags you probably should be using XML and using XSLT to transform that 
structure into HTML+CSS or whatever presentation layer format 

A data tag could be used as a catch-all for core data types and doing 
transformations client side. Done right it would also have handlers that could 
call custom javascript for converting the raw data format to display format 
prior to rendering. Perhaps that would provide extensibility at the expense of 
semantic relevance. An alt like tag could always be  provided to give readers 
or other formats something semantic to play with.

The lack of lengh and other non-time tags is probably due to the belief that 
html marks up documents and time is a common field in relation to how documents 
are marked up and defined. For instance a document has a creation and 
modified/publication date. This was a weaker point I made in my original reply 
to Jukka. Time is just a more common need than other measurements, and a more 
complicated problem space than representing units of measure cross-culturally. 
Units of measure tend to be known and consistent internationally especially for 
business and trade. Time is trickier.

While I understand the virtue of XML+XSLT/CSS to keep content and its face 
separate. I personally feel that taking the separation of content and 
formatting mentality to HTML makes sense; I realize it is too late in the game 
for that observation, but what can I say the emperor looks naked to me ... and 
he ain't that pretty.

Well, this was supposed to be a shorter email, sorry it got long. If, however, 
it spurred any feedback from anybody who is or has been involved with the 
working groups to clarify or correct anything I've written here I think that 
would go a long way to help the public list understand decisions.

Art C

Reply via email to