[PATCH] rakudo Re: Parrot packaging problems

[Patrick R. Michaud]

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 04:24:45PM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On 4/10/09, Patrick R. Michaud <pmichaud at pobox.com> wrote:
> > We can change the releases to be the 200903 form if that's
> > much better.  But I personally much prefer the 2009-03 form
> > ("2009-03" is an ISO standard date form, whereas "200903" isn't).
>
> FWIW, 200903 is perfectly valid per ISO-8601; all separators are
> optional, except the "W" in dates given by week number and day instead
> of month and date.

Actually, 200903 is not a valid ISO-8601 date, at least not according
to ISO 8601:2004 section 4.1.2.3 ("Representations with reduced
accuracy") [1]:

    If in a given application it is sufficient to express a 
    calendar date with less accuracy than a complete representation 
    as specified in 4.1.2.2, either two, four or six digits may be 
    omitted, the omission starting from the extreme right-hand side. 
    The resulting representation will then indicate a month, a 
    year or a century, as set out below. When only [DD] is omitted, 
    a separator shall be inserted between [YYYY] and [MM], but
    separators shall not be used in the other representations with 
    reduced accuracy.

Thus "2009-05-11", "20090511", and "2009-05" are all valid ISO 8601
dates, but "200905" is not valid because the separator is required when
only the day-of-month is omitted from the date.

Thanks,

Pm

[1] http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/4021199/ISO_8601_2004_E.zip?func=doc.Fetch&nodeid=4021199, link taken from wikipedia.org [2]
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601