[ List Archives Home ] [ Thread index for 2008 ] [ Date index for 2008 ] [ Author index for 2008 ]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
>>> driscoll@xxxxxxxxxx 03/17/03 06:43AM >>>
The helpdesk says that the system can't store 1932 because '32' is the ASCII character for a blank.
<<<

That has got to be one of the lamest 'answers' I have ever heard. 

Their explanation could possibly, maybe make sense if it's stored as text AND it is doing some translation to block out control characters, but that sounds like a bug, not a feature. "1932" would be 'Device control character 3'-'space', but why on earth would you do that? Why not just take any string of numbers and let them be the year if this isn't stored as a timestamp?

If it's a timestamp, then the year 1932 has no special signifcance AFAIK. It's not prior to the Beginning of Time for 32-bit Unix systems (Fri, 13 Dec 1901 20:45:52 GMT) nor is it special for 64 bit machines either.

One question I have for you though: when you had Innovative setup the field for you did you have it set to display mm-dd-yy or mm-dd-yyyy? Are you sure the dates between 01 and 37 are really 1901-1937 and not 2001-2037?

Here's an alternate theory:

The editor won't let you enter any dates that have 2038 as the year in places like the expiration date. Even those dates in 2038 that are prior to the end of time (Tue, 19 Jan 2038 03:14:08 GMT). Is that true for the birthdate as well?

The editor also converts ANY date prior to 1970 to be 1970 in places such as the expiration date. The editor also assumes two year dates between 00 and 37 to be in the 2000 millenia when loading records or when the millennia and century aren't prompted. 

What if the editor control for the birthdate is somehow combining these and not allowing you to enter dates that would be 38 years before the start of time (Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 GMT), but is safely allowing you to enter any other date between the beginning of time (Fri, 13 Dec 1901 20:45:52 GMT) and the start of time? 

The math seems to work (1970-38=1932). If it's allowing you to enter dates between 1901 and 1970, but just not 1932, it seems like the most plausible answer.

Will it let you enter a date prior to the beginning of time (Fri, 13 Dec 1901 20:45:52 GMT)? What are people doing for their REALLY old patrons? :-)

Again, though, if that is the explanation, then it's a bug, not a feature.

HTH,
David






________________________________________________________________________
David Jones                                        mailto:djones@xxxxxxxxxx
Library Systems Manager                      http://www.scu.edu/library/
Orradre Library                                      fax:   408-551-1805
Santa Clara University                               phone: 408-551-7167
500 El Camino Real
Santa Clara CA 95053-0500
________________________________________________________________________
"Music is the hot sauce on the burrrrito of life"
--Rikochet, Mucha Lucha [ http://www2.warnerbros.com/lucha/home.html ]