imartinezortiz
commented
1 month ago @Felungs comment:
Overall, I think we should go with dateTimeStamp over dateTime because xAPI doesn't support timestamp without timezone or offset which IMO makes dateTimeStamp more correct than dateTime
dateTime
- https://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#dateTime
- Already used within xAPI Profile ontology for Profile Version generatedAt timestamp
- RDF built in
dateTimeStamp
The dateTimeStamp datatype is ·derived· from dateTime by giving the value required to its explicitTimezone facet. The result is that all values of dateTimeStamp are required to have explicit time zone offsets and the datatype is totally ordered.
- https://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#dateTimeStamp
- added in XSD 1.1
Both XSD types have differences from RFC 3339 but that can be accounted for within normative language. (example within explanation section of https://validator.w3.org/feed/docs/error/InvalidRFC3339Date.html)
- [x] replace dateTime within profile context?
- [x] informative + normative language for timestamps
andyjohnson
Change Log Item Ids
s19, s20, s22
1.0.3 text -> 9274.1.1 Update
A Timestamp SHOULD* be expressed using the format described in RFC 3339, which is a profile of ISO 8601 -> A Timestamp shall be expressed using the format described in RFC 3339, which is a profile of ISO 8601.
A Timestamp SHOULD* include the time zone. -> Removed as requirement
The LRS SHOULD* return the Timestamp in UTC timezone. -> An LRS shall convert Timestamps to UTC rather than rejecting Statements that send Timestamps not in UTC form
Updates to xAPI Profile spec
References to consider
This issue has been migrated from: https://github.com/FeLungs/xapi-profiles/issues/7