Re: SQL*Forms and the 21st Century

mcallister_at_grad.missouri.edu (Andrew McAllister) wrote:
>
> In article <DB07FJ.AJ1_at_CSUFresno.EDU> stevec_at_zimmer.CSUFresno.EDU (Steve Cosner) writes:
> >From: stevec_at_zimmer.CSUFresno.EDU (Steve Cosner)
> >Subject: Re: SQL*Forms and the 21st Century
> >Date: Fri, 30 Jun 1995 20:54:55 GMT
 

> >In article <3svdmp$nek_at_mccoy.ici.net> jack_at_ici.net (Jack Bell) writes:
> >>Greetings Oracle users!
> >>
> >>As the 21st Century approaches a problem has surfaced with some
> >>SQL*Forms 3.0 data input forms I created. It involves the
> >>evaluation of dates which occur beyond 31-DEC-1999. The forms
> >>use the default DD-MON-YY format for date display. Users
> >>noticed that dates entered with 00 for the year were always
> >>evaluated as occuring in 1900. To correct this I made an
> >>on-validate-field trigger as follows:
 snip
> >Your alternative to using something complex like this is to force
> >users to enter 4-digit years, which they will probably hate.
 

> >I know what you are saying: you hate it! But, if anyone can find a
> >better solution to processing dates, then please... let us all know!
>
>
> >Steve Cosner (stevec_at_csufresno.edu)
> Oracle 7 supports the new date format DD-MON-RR. This will automagically
> change any date < 49 to the next century and >= 50 to this century. So
> 31-Dec-35 is Dec 31, 2035 and 31-Dec-99 is Dec 31, 1999.
>
> Don't know if forms 3 or whatever supports this format, but it is worth a try.
> Andy
> Andrew McAllister -- mcallister_at_grad.missouri.edu
> Office of Research, University of Missouri-Columbia
> The views above are my own, and NOT those of my employer.

It doesn't, sadly.

Cheers

JT Received on Mon Jul 03 1995 - 00:00:00 CEST