[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] Issue Comment Edited: (OFFICE-1052) PublicComment: ODFF: DAYS360
[ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-1052?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18618#action_18618 ]
Eike Rathke edited comment on OFFICE-1052 at 4/16/10 5:10 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------
We have an implicit conversion from Boolean to Number (Integer), so no problem.
Regarding the original comment:
#1 We don't strive to be Excel bug compatible. Yes, OOo replicated that bug for interoperability, as also stated in the offset note. However, we can hardly say in a standard that evaluators may replicate a bug of Excel.. We almost do that for "1900 is a leap year", but...
As Excel, OOo and apparently also Gnumeric all implement the modified behavior we should simply define that and not the ideal NASD method and state in an offset rationale that the definition is slightly different. We did that also for 3.11.6 Basis (YEARFRAC and related).
#2 We do not want to specify more date systems than evaluators currently implement.
was (Author: erack):
We have an implicit conversion from Boolean to Number (Integer), so no problem.
Regarding the original comment:
#1 We don't strive to be Excel bug compatible. Yes, OOo replicated that bug for interoperability, as also stated in the offset note. However, we can hardly say in a standard that evaluators may replicate a bug of Excel.. We almost do that for "1900 is a leap year", but...
#2 We do not want to specify more date systems than evaluators currently implement.
> Public Comment: ODFF: DAYS360
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: OFFICE-1052
> URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-1052
> Project: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: OpenFormula
> Reporter: Robert Weir
> Assignee: Eike Rathke
> Fix For: ODF 1.2 Part 2 CD 3
>
>
> Copied from office-comment list
> Original author: "David King" <openoffice@drking.plus.com>
> Original date: 12 Aug 2008 22:00:01 -0000
> Original URL: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200808/msg00022.html
> From that comment mail:
> DAYS360 and financial date systems
> * Consider whether to specify compliance with the Excel NASD date bug or introduce a switch for NASD compliance. The bug has to be mentioned I think.
> * The date systems implemented by Excel and specified by ODFF are only a subset of date systems used in practice, which might be worth noting.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]