Clean Date Act - by date type fields

At 12:57 AM 1/8/98 +0000, you wrote:
>on 01/06/98at 09:58 AM,  our friend Dan Swartz
><dswartz@courts.state.pa.us> said:
>
>>We're embarking on some database design issues and I wanted to know how
>>others felt about the use of date type fields versus just numeric type
>>fields (format would be CCYYMMDD).  
>
>Take some time and try out the L-date field.  It has some  verrry nice
>features and i'd bet nickles to cupcakes that more features are already on
>the drawing boards.  There are drawbacks (mainly, imho, that the L-date
>field can not be an invalid date.  For example, a future-due date can not
>be blank, zeros, or null.)  
>
>But do some messing around with it  -  I'm getting used to it and I like
>it.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------
>Booth Martin     
>---------------------------------------------------
There is not  real objection to invalid  dates.  It should help enforce the
"Clean Date Act of  CCYY".

What I do  object to is the very common  and valid  lack of blank, zeros,
nulls, which  might be a valid case for new and future items.

That is my nickels  worth [$.05]


Glenn
___________________________________________________
Glenn Ericson,          Phoenix Consulting                      
P O Box 701164   East Elmhurst NY 11370-3164 USA                            
Phone 718 898 9805       Fax 718 446 1150
AS/400 & Year 2000- - Solutions Specialists
 © 1998copyright,  all rights reserved
____________________________________________________


 
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---