[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [office-formula] Year 1900 bug
Your proposed wording is certainly an improvement. I think further improvement could be found by assuming that there is always a mapping between ordinal dates and calendar dates in effect for a formula evaluation. Some mappings have a 1900-02-29 and others don't. (This impacts day of week determination and other nutty things, of course.) I see two parameters involved in translating between ordinal dates and calendar dates: What is the origin date and on what (not-necessarily Gregorian) calendar. I suspect that these are parameters of the global context in which an evaluation occurs. If the parameters are selectable or even variable in conforming implementations of an OpenFormula-hosting specification, the use of origins and calendars that introduce 1900-02-29 as a date should be dealt with there. Also, the consequences of assuming a different origin and calendar or being able to change it can be addressed there. Once we establish what we mean for the global parameters that are bound by an OpenFormula-hosting specification that supports date calculations, I don't think there is anything more to say. We might have a note about pitfalls, but I don't think there is any normative language required at all other than the mapping and its selection, if any, SHALL be specified by the OpenFormula-hosting specification. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:patrick@durusau.net] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-formula/201001/msg00074.html Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2010 13:55 To: office-formula@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [office-formula] Year 1900 bug Greetings! I am sweeping the draft for application/implementation -> evaluator purposes and encountered: > Applications *may* reproduce the 1900-as-leap-year bug for > compatibility purposes, but *should not*. > I suppose it is the combination of a permission with a recommendation against following that permission that strikes me as odd. Perhaps better: "Applications should reproduce the 1900-as-leap-year bug for compatibility purposes only." Yes? Hope everyone is having a great weekend! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34 Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]