Re: Format date....
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2003
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 53633
interpreted = N
texte = They shouldn't have to rename it, or even necessarily change the [date] = tag. But adding a [now] or [today] that returns the current date and time = no matter where you are may be a feasible option. --=20 Matthew C. Bohne Web Developer Sandusky Register 314 W. Market St. Sandusky, OH 44870 419-625-5500 ext. 253 matthewbohne@sanduskyregister.com http://www.sanduskyregister.com On Monday, October 27, 2003 1:50 PM, Brian Fries
wrote: >Unfortunately, they can't rename the [date] field in an order file=20 >without breaking tons of existing code that expects [date] to be the=20 >order's date within an orderfile context. As for not behaving the same=20 >as the global [date] tag, that's because its a field in a special-case=20 >database, not a WebDNA tag. The behavior is the same as if you created=20 >your own database with a field named "date" then tried to access the=20 >date context within a founditems on that database. > >- brian > >On Monday, October 27, 2003, at 09:43 AM, Dan Strong wrote: > >> My $0.02 would be to name them [ORDER_DATE] & [ORDER_TIME] >> -Dan >> >> >> On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 10:44:31 -0600 >> Donovan Brooke wrote: >>> I actually agree with you Alan that these two date >>> contexts should have been named differently but it has >>> always been that way. I think it is silly to have them >>> the same name... they don't even perform the same. >>> I vote to change the name of the orderfile tags to: >>> [ODATE][OTIME]! >>> (I've stated this before but my ideas to the list rarely >>> seem to get feedback :-( Maybe I'm a freak!? (well that's >>> already been established) >>> >>> Also to note: >>> Scott did mention: >>> >>> If you are using WebDNA 5, you can 'scope out' to the global [date]=20 >>> and >>> [time] tags, when inside an orderfile context, using the scope=20 >>> resolution >>> operator '::'. >>> >>> [::date] >>> [::time] >>> >>> >>> Donovan >>> >>> >>> Alan White wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks Mark, that did the trick :D >>>> >>>> That's kind of weird that it was having problems in the orderfile,=20 >>>> surely >>>> date is something that is very important when it comes to orders??? >>>> >>>> Oh well, cheers for your suggestion. >>>> >>>> Alan >-- Brian Fries, BrainScan Software -- http://www.brainscansoftware.com=20 > -- > > >------------------------------------------------------------- >This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . >To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to >Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ > ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
They shouldn't have to rename it, or even necessarily change the [date] = tag. But adding a [now] or [today] that returns the current date and time = no matter where you are may be a feasible option. --=20 Matthew C. Bohne Web Developer Sandusky Register 314 W. Market St. Sandusky, OH 44870 419-625-5500 ext. 253 matthewbohne@sanduskyregister.com http://www.sanduskyregister.com On Monday, October 27, 2003 1:50 PM, Brian Fries wrote: >Unfortunately, they can't rename the [date] field in an order file=20 >without breaking tons of existing code that expects [date] to be the=20 >order's date within an orderfile context. As for not behaving the same=20 >as the global [date] tag, that's because its a field in a special-case=20 >database, not a WebDNA tag. The behavior is the same as if you created=20 >your own database with a field named "date" then tried to access the=20 >date context within a founditems on that database. > >- brian > >On Monday, October 27, 2003, at 09:43 AM, Dan Strong wrote: > >> My $0.02 would be to name them [ORDER_DATE] & [ORDER_TIME] >> -Dan >> >> >> On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 10:44:31 -0600 >> Donovan Brooke wrote: >>> I actually agree with you Alan that these two date >>> contexts should have been named differently but it has >>> always been that way. I think it is silly to have them >>> the same name... they don't even perform the same. >>> I vote to change the name of the orderfile tags to: >>> [ODATE][OTIME]! >>> (I've stated this before but my ideas to the list rarely >>> seem to get feedback :-( Maybe I'm a freak!? (well that's >>> already been established) >>> >>> Also to note: >>> Scott did mention: >>> >>> If you are using WebDNA 5, you can 'scope out' to the global [date]=20 >>> and >>> [time] tags, when inside an orderfile context, using the scope=20 >>> resolution >>> operator '::'. >>> >>> [::date] >>> [::time] >>> >>> >>> Donovan >>> >>> >>> Alan White wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks Mark, that did the trick :D >>>> >>>> That's kind of weird that it was having problems in the orderfile,=20 >>>> surely >>>> date is something that is very important when it comes to orders??? >>>> >>>> Oh well, cheers for your suggestion. >>>> >>>> Alan >-- Brian Fries, BrainScan Software -- http://www.brainscansoftware.com=20 > -- > > >------------------------------------------------------------- >This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . >To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to >Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ > ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Matthew Bohne
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
frames & carts (1997)
Still Learning (1997)
Help Please WebDNA 6 Secure Forms Problem (2004)
WebCatalog for Postcards ? (1997)
Another Excel Problem (2003)
[convertchars] limits (1998)
database size? (1997)
[input] [/input] (1997)
Merging databases (1997)
UPS charges (2000)
Webcat Manual and TeaRoom Examples Uses Different Examples. (1997)
[URL] and [showif] or [hideif] comparisons (2003)
WebCat2: Master Counter snippet (1997)
[WebDNA] unix timestamp in WebDNA (2009)
WebCatalog/WebMerchant 2.1 (1998)
syntax question, not in online refernce (1997)
&fieldsdir=ra truely random?? (2000)
UPDATE PROBLEM (1997)
Show if time tags (1997)
LetterRip and WebCat (1998)