Re: problems with RRRR format

[Quoted] In article <3648124b.601361982_at_news.brookes.ac.uk>,   p0070621_at_brookes.ac.uk (Tommy Wareing) wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Nov 1998 02:20:54 GMT, ravipadma_at_aol.com wrote:
>
> >We are planning to use RRRR format at the form level for Y2K compliance. Did
> >any of you experience problems with this format. Thanks a lot in advance.
> >Ravi.
>
> a) We've never used it, but I think it's RR, not RRRR.
> b) The reason we've never used it is that we have to deal with dates
> before 1950. RR turns 50-99 into 1950-1999, and 00-49 into 2000-2049.
>
> It's not truly compliant (IMO) unless you can enter (for example) both
> 1949 and 2049. This means 4 digit year fields.

The RR format is documented, and RRRR seems to work in forms, too, but in my Forms documentation, I can't find any reference to RRRR, so be careful. We use MMDDRR for the format mask in every input date, but then use a function in the When-Validate-Item trigger to convert the date to a "sliding century" date: It forces the century to fall within a 100-year period from 89 years before the current year up to 10 years ahead of the current year. The function relies on the current year, so it changes as the years move forward.

I have put the pl/sql code for the function on my website under the "Programming Tips" link.

Steve Cosner
http://members.aol.com/stevec5088 -- Download the QA Utility Form: Display/Update any table.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own Received on Thu Nov 12 1998 - 00:00:00 CET