Re: [PATCH] oc-basic: support biblatex date field

["Bruce D'Arcus" <bdarcus@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 1:44 PM Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> "Bruce D'Arcus" <bdarcus@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > This is a tiny change that just checks for a 'date' field if 'year' is
> > nil, and if present, grabs the first four characters.
>
> The date field may also be nil, leading to an error.

Can you please fix that, if the patchis otherwise fine?

> Is there a guarantee that the date field starts with the year?

Not 100% guarantee, but should be close.

The biblatex manual (section 2.3.8 Date and Time Specifications), says
the following:

"Date fields such as the default data model dates date, origdate,
eventdate, and urldate adhere to iso8601-2 Extended Format
specification level 1."

This is an extension to standard 8601 dates, previously known as EDTF
(extended date-time format).

So for the vast majority of cases, yes; the value would be standard 8601 dates.

The exceptions should be very rare open-ended ranged dates; from table 3.

../1997
/1997

I do not, however, have a good knowledge of what people do in the
wild. It just seems like such a critical data field should be
supported.

Bruce

PS - FSF confirmed my copyright assignment today.