Re: problems with RRRR format

On Thu, 19 Nov 1998 00:21:14 -0500, "David K. Van Zandt" <dvanzandt_at_iquest.net> wrote:
>For the "AMERICAN" language settings, with apologies to Tommy, the
>remediated year value is valid in both two-byte and four-byte
>templates. Remember that in Oracle RDBMS, the DATE datatype is actually
>a "masked" varchar type -- the two vs. four display is simply a view of
>the underlying data.
>
>How this sliding-window date format "interprets" the two-byte display is
>dependent upon the SYSDATE value. The "implied" century columns are
>interpreted one way for system dates in this century, but that shifts
>once the system date rolls over.
 

> Tommy Wareing wrote
>> It's not truly compliant (IMO) unless you can enter (for example) both
>> 1949 and 2049. This means 4 digit year fields.

Yes, I know that both formats are valid in the database, but I don't believe that the sliding century concept actually solves the year 2000 problem: if the user wants to be able to enter 1900, 1910, 1950, 1999, 2001 and 2050, then the ONLY way they can do this is to have access to a four digit year field.

We also use a sliding century patch, but on four digit year fields, so 00 becomes 2000, but the user can change this back to 1900 if they so wish. 50 becomes 1950, but again they can change this to 2050 if they want.

--
Tommy Wareing
MIS Group
Learning Resources
Oxford Brookes University
01865 483389