On Wednesday, 2007-03-21 14:48:32 -0500, David A. Wheeler wrote:
> 100% agree, on all counts.
>
> However, I think there needs to be a way to access the value without the chopping-off behavior. I believe that everyone's VALUE() implementations already do this; is that correct?
At least it SHOULD. Excel and OOo do, but Gnumeric 1.4 and Kspread 1.4
don't. So far we didn't require that. Should we make that a SHOULD or
a SHALL?
> That would mean that people who don't want this behavior should use VALUE, i.e., VALUE("1999-11-22 12:34:56") wouldn't chop off some of the information.
>
> The current VALUE documentation doesn't mandate this behavior, though. Presuming there are no objections, can you copy/paste the relevant text into VALUE so that "1999-11-22 12:34:56" will be handled without the chopping-off behavior?
Done with a SHALL for now, unless someone objects. While speaking of ISO
8601 formats in those functions: ISO specifies an optional 'T' between
date an time, to make the string one word for processing, where humans
usually write a blank instead. OOo supports the 'T' separator, but no
other application seems to. Should we make that a SHOULD? I now did so.
Eike
--
Automatic string conversions considered dangerous. They are the GOTO statements
of spreadsheets. --Robert Weir on the OpenDocument formula subcommittee's list.
