You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
What specific section or headline is this issue about?
Calendars
What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete?
Another minor 'feels a little weird' tweak:
The concept of a "week" is not connected with any astronomical event, but is a cultural construct. Therefore, weeks can have 4, 5, 6, 8, or more days, or not even a fixed number of days. To get the specific number of days of the week of a date, use the date's daysInWeek.
I assume that 7 was left out of here because it is the assumed default/most common, but the way this is worded currently, it felt strange to me that 7 wasn't mentioned at all. If this default assumption was made more explicit, I think that would improve the feel of this paragraph.
What did you expect to see?
A potential rewording:
The concept of a "week" is not connected with any astronomical event, but is a cultural construct. While the most common length is 7 days, weeks can also have4, 5, 6, 8, or more days — or even lack a fixed number of days altogether.
Do you have any supporting links, references, or citations?
0xdevalias
changed the title
[Temporal]
[Temporal] Explicitly mention 7 when talking about days in a week, rather than leaving it as an assumed 'default knowledge'
Feb 6, 2025
Yes, feel free to post PRs directly instead of issues, as those are more likely to be addressed quickly.
The purpose of this section is more to clear up some misassumptions about calendar information, so "you already know what Gregorian looks like" is implied.
Josh-Cena
added
accepting PR
Feel free to open a PR to resolve this issue
and removed
needs triage
Triage needed by staff and/or partners. Automatically applied when an issue is opened.
labels
Feb 6, 2025
so "you already know what Gregorian looks like" is implied.
As a westerner, makes sense and is my default for sure. But my feel was that not everyone reading this may have the same defaults as me, therefore it would be better to be explicit than to rely on assuming cultural norms (doubly so in a section talking about how cultural norms differ)
MDN URL
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Temporal#calendars
What specific section or headline is this issue about?
Calendars
What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete?
Another minor 'feels a little weird' tweak:
I assume that
7
was left out of here because it is the assumed default/most common, but the way this is worded currently, it felt strange to me that7
wasn't mentioned at all. If this default assumption was made more explicit, I think that would improve the feel of this paragraph.What did you expect to see?
A potential rewording:
Do you have any supporting links, references, or citations?
No response
Do you have anything more you want to share?
@Josh-Cena FYI RE: this request for review
Though in light of this:
I will probably just also knock up a PR for this shortly, unless I hear any strong objections to it prior.
MDN metadata
Page report details
en-us/web/javascript/reference/global_objects/temporal
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: