Re: L-date fields

[lgoodbar@xxxxxxxxxxx (lg - Loyd Goodbar)]

On Mon, 15 Sep 97 20:26:51 -0400, boothm@ibm.net wrote:

>on 09/15/97 at 08:48 PM, lgoodbar@tecinfo.com (lg - Loyd Goodbar) said:
>
>
 If today is 1997/09/15, and the user enters 091597, the
>
system will "assume" 1997; however, if the user enters 091697, the
>
computer "assumes" the previous century because the date is "after"
>
today. 
>
>Unless of course it is a "date-due", or the "expiration date", or
>on&on&on.  To my mind this is the problem we face with trying to guess
>centuries.  By the time we have figured out a common strategy and reached
>a state of concordance on the issue it'll be half-way thru 1998, and down
>to 500 days.

PRECISELY why we should (for the short term) force the user to enter
the full date. After Y2K settles down, THEN we could sit down to
discuss business rules for smart date windowing, if that's the
direction to take. (The example above was for birthdays...)

And to the person who stated that we should standardize on a common
calendar date format (1997-09-15), I agree! One less barrier of
ambiguity.

 - lg -

--
A book: ...turn a page, read, read, read, read...
Television: ...click, watch, watch, watch, watch...
The Web: ...click, wait, wait, wait, wait, read...
lgoodbar@tecinfo.com  ICQ#504581  http://www.tecinfo.com/~lgoodbar/
+---
| 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 MAJORDOMO@midrange.com
|    and specify 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---