Re: [office-formula] YEARFRAC again

[Eike Rathke <erack@sun.com>]

Hi Andreas,

On Thursday, 2007-01-25 13:33:20 -0700, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:

> I don't think a smallest common denominator system really improves
> interoperability. I think we should define as many basis numbers as
> reasonable and then define the behaviour if a basis number is not
> implemented. This may encourage programs to in fact support those basis
> numbers.

Defining basis numbers in advance may lead to the situation where Excel
defines a new basis number in the same range and ODF applications can't
cope with it. There is no guarantee that this won't happen.

> The alternative would be that spreadsheets have to add their own
> functions to support those other systems.

I'd prefer to not add new functionality to already existing functions.
Is there really a need to support other systems not covered yet, and
which are they?

  Eike

-- 
Automatic string conversions considered dangerous. They are the GOTO statements
of spreadsheets.  --Robert Weir on the OpenDocument formula subcommittee's list.