Talk:DYWKRN - Revision history

Rmm at 03:53, 14 February 2017

2017-02-14T03:53:02Z

Rmm at 08:24, 15 January 2010

2010-01-15T08:24:35Z

Jens at 07:04, 17 September 2009

2009-09-17T07:04:25Z

Rmm: New page: ~~~~ : This attribute is defined for use with the suggested change to Talk:WKDYWK and new attribute DYOFWK. It is intended for coding ranges of weekdays in a compact format and sta...

2009-08-24T23:23:46Z

New page: ~~~~ : This attribute is defined for use with the suggested change to Talk:WKDYWK and new attribute DYOFWK. It is intended for coding ranges of weekdays in a compact format and sta...

New page

[[User:Rmm|raphael]] 23:23, 24 August 2009 (UTC) : This attribute is defined for use with the suggested change to [[Talk:WKDYWK]] and new attribute [[DYOFWK]]. It is intended for coding ranges of weekdays in a compact format and staying within the letter and the spirit of S-100 concerning list values and complex variables. While the current version of S-100 (Version 0.0.3) does not make an explicit statement saying so, implicit suggestions in it and reports of past discussions in TSMAD suggest that encoding of list values (e.g., "1,2,3,4") will no longer be allowed (instead, repeated instances of the attribute are supposed to be used), that is, (roughly speaking) instead of

attributeA="1,2,3,4"

it would be necessary to code

attributeA=1<br>
attributeA=2<br>
attributeA=3<br>
attributeA=4

The situation may change, so it will be worth reviewing this after any relevant updates to the S-100 draft.

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:53, 14 February 2017
Line 17:		Line 17:

	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 08:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC): Looks like list values like "1,2,3,5,7" won't be allowed in S-100 compliant data.		[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 08:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC): Looks like list values like "1,2,3,5,7" won't be allowed in S-100 compliant data.
		+
		+	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] ([[User talk:Rmm\|talk]]) 04:53, 14 February 2017 (CET): Current GI registry [http://registry.iho.int/feature/view.do?recordID=2004161&page=1&type=3&status=2 definition] looks OK: 'A statement expressing if the days of the week identified define a range or not.'

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:24, 15 January 2010
Line 15:		Line 15:

	o.k. We will see what S100 version 0.0.4 offers.		o.k. We will see what S100 version 0.0.4 offers.
		+
		+	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 08:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC): Looks like list values like "1,2,3,5,7" won't be allowed in S-100 compliant data.

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:04, 17 September 2009
Line 11:		Line 11:

	The situation may change, so it will be worth reviewing this after any relevant updates to the S-100 draft.		The situation may change, so it will be worth reviewing this after any relevant updates to the S-100 draft.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 07:04, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	o.k. We will see what S100 version 0.0.4 offers.