Re: [xsl] Standards checkers for XSLT

Subject: Re: [xsl] Standards checkers for XSLT
From: Rashmi Rubdi <dev_subscriptions@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 20:08:33 -0800 (PST)
Sorry I should have been more clear.

Consider this XML as an example
       <title>Cello Performance by XYZ</title>

<title>Violin by ABC</title>

another example of the same data

Performance by XYZ</title>
       <title>Violin by
Now sorting of events
by their dateTime becomes more straighforward when both the date and time are
combined as opposed to having them under separate tags. 

Given that events is
the context node
<xsl:apply-templates select="event>
I haven't tried this pseudo

Also comparing dateTime is also easier with the full format, when you
want to find out which even occurs before another event. 

Calculating the
time duration between events also become easier with the full date

If you use separate nodes for date and time, you'll have an
additional step of concatinating the date and time and then converting it into
xs:dateTime and then using the resulting value. 

I hope this helps.

Original Message ----
From: Kamal Bhatt <kbhatt@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 9:54:00 PM
Subject: Re: [xsl] Standards checkers for XSLT

I think the approach is that
the sorts of calculations you are talking 
about are done before the
production of XML. The XSLT would be used for 
formatting purposes.

Rubdi wrote:
> I don't mean to contradict and there might be valid reasons in
your application for using the short-hand date format 
> YYYY-MM-DD instead of
CCYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS+Z but, there are a few more advantages of using the
composite date format that also includes
> time instead of just the date.
For example, it's more straightforward to calculate the *duration* between two
dateTimes when the dates are represented in full format. 
> The time-zone is
optional, so if you represent it as CCYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS it assumes the
implicit time-zone of the server combined with daylight savings.
> I think
if your application is going to be complex with many possible scenarios then I
would consider using the full format, 
> but if your application tends to be
small and doesn't deal with event math or dateTimes then the shorter version
of dateTime seems fine. 
> But thinking in terms of making the application
as change-proof and future-proof as possible (to be able to easily handle all
possible future situations with as little or no change to the original design)
, I would use the full date format.
> In either case there are functions in
XPath2.0 which allow you to combine dates or break them up in any way, which
makes it flexible to use any date format.
> ----- Original Message ----
From: Kamal Bhatt <kbhatt@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 7:04:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [xsl] Standards
checkers for XSLT
> Rashmi Rubdi wrote:
>> Using a common and
standard convention for representing dates helps significantly when
manipulating date fields.
>> The standard format is 
>> Example:
>> 2004-10-01T18:23:17+00:00
>> With
this representation it's easier and manageable to sort date fields because
it's a sortable value unlike a date represented in say MM/DD/YYYY format.
>> While displaying dates the XPath2.0 format-date function can be used to
display the date in a particular locale. 
>> There might be other benefits
like add and subtract dates, but I haven't refered these functions.
> I think we use YYYY-MM-DD (we don't handle timezones), but thanks
> the tip.

Kamal Bhatt
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

Current Thread