Re: [office-formula] Conflict between Part 1 and Part 2

[Andreas Guelzow <andreas.guelzow@concordia.ab.ca>]

On 2010-02-08, at 11:53 AM, "Eric Patterson" <ericpa@exchange.microsoft.com 
 > wrote:

> On Saturday, February 06, 2010 2:05 PM, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote,
>
>>> 4) To be consistent with part 1, the "shall" requirement for  
>>> support in
>>> part 2 should be amended to say dates from 1899-12-31 through 9999-12-31
>>> shall be supported.
>>
>> Which of course forces applications with a null-date of later than
>> 1899-12-31 to support negative dates. I have no problem with that  
>> but we
>> should be aware of that implication.
>
> I don't believe this is the case.  The null-date indicates that the  
> time 24:00 on the date specified is equal to the serial number value  
> of zero.  We can require that a null-date of 1899-12-31 be supported  
> without the actual date 1899-12-31 being supported as an input value  
> in a spreadsheet and without the support for negative dates.
>

If we require that all dates from 1899-31-1 onwards shall be  
supported, then an implementation with nulldate 1903-12-31 will be  
required to support negative dates.

I am abut surprised about you mentioning of 24:00 since that would be  
at the end of the day. Did you mean 0:00?

Andreas