Draft for review: ISO 8601 date work on IS 29500

Jesper Lund Stocholm jesper.stocholm at ciber.dk
Mon Jul 26 07:27:14 CEST 2010

Hi all,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Rae [mailto:Chris.Rae at microsoft.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 23, 2010 11:28 PM
> To: Jesper Lund Stocholm; rjelliffe at allette.com.au; e-sc34-wg4 at ecma-
> international.org
> Subject: RE: Draft for review: ISO 8601 date work on IS 29500
> Hi guys - I do feel quite strongly about this, partly because I think
> there's been confusion in IS 29500 before regarding formulas and
> functions. Any operator in a formula is effectively a function. In
> example you mention that you would not convert C2 and C1 to numbers
> when parsing - however, if you do not convert them to serials, there's
> nowhere in IS 29500 that specifies that the answer should be 1
> no runtime date type, and as such there's no description of how to use
> it).
> As soon as we start heading down the route of having C1+C2 treated
> differently to SUM(C1,C2), I think we're doing badness.

I do think there is a (subtle) difference between an operator and a
function, but I don't think we should split hairs on this - it is
certainly not my area of expertise. My main point with my original
suggestion was to get the word "may" into the text.


Med venlig hilsen / Best regards

Jesper Lund Stocholm

CIBER Danmark A/S
Mobil: +45 3094 5570
Email: jesper.stocholm at ciber.dk

More information about the sc34wg4 mailing list