Re: dates as search criteria
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2000
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 28637
interpreted = N
texte = >I won't forget the 'rule', ...but I AM successfully using this search to find records in a date range and I do believe I got the technique straight from the docs... > >[Search db=some.db >&mrDayOrdereddatarq=[mrDayOrdereddatarq] >&xrDayOrdereddatarq=[xrDayOrdereddatarq] >&max=[max] >&startat=[start] >&DayOrderedtype=date >&TimeOrderedtype=time >&DayOrderedsort=1 >&TimeOrderedsort=2 >&DayOrderedsdir=de >&TimeOrderedsdir=de] > >I don't mean to argue I just would like to know what really are the definative rule(s) here... I was told a long time ago that the *ONLY* situation acceptable to use the same field name in more than one search parameter is with the cl comparison operator. Of course this kind of inportant information never seems to make it into the docs no matter how many years go by. A little bit of effort on SM'a part to document the rules would go a long way here ...Of course, maybe the person who told me that was wrong ... if your example above works, great! Then again, I cannot find your example in the docs, the only thing I see in the docs is two separate descriptions for mr and xr and neither of them have any examples.On the other hand, when using mr and xr they must obviously be used together -- in order to create the range webcatalog uses in its search -- so it only makes sense that webcatalog should not require the group field technique in this case.Perhaps this is one situation where you can actually use two search parameters on the same database field without having to use the group field technique. The only other one I have heard of is when using the cl operator, which I doubt anyone uses anyways.If you actually take a look at the way the cl operator has to be used, you will see that it is inconsistent with the way all other search parameters are used. When the cl operator is used, it absolutely *requires* that the two parameters using the cl prefix appear in the proper order within the search context -- or the results will be very different.Nowhere else in the webdna language does the order of the search parameters matter to webcatalog!================================ Kenneth Grome, WebDNA Consultant 808-737-6499 http://webdna.net ================================------------------------------------------------------------- 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
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
>I won't forget the 'rule', ...but I AM successfully using this search to find records in a date range and I do believe I got the technique straight from the docs... > >[Search db=some.db >&mrDayOrdereddatarq=[mrDayOrdereddatarq] >&xrDayOrdereddatarq=[xrDayOrdereddatarq] >&max=[max] >&startat=[start] >&DayOrderedtype=date >&TimeOrderedtype=time >&DayOrderedsort=1 >&TimeOrderedsort=2 >&DayOrderedsdir=de >&TimeOrderedsdir=de] > >I don't mean to argue I just would like to know what really are the definative rule(s) here... I was told a long time ago that the *ONLY* situation acceptable to use the same field name in more than one search parameter is with the cl comparison operator. Of course this kind of inportant information never seems to make it into the docs no matter how many years go by. A little bit of effort on SM'a part to document the rules would go a long way here ...Of course, maybe the person who told me that was wrong ... if your example above works, great! Then again, I cannot find your example in the docs, the only thing I see in the docs is two separate descriptions for mr and xr and neither of them have any examples.On the other hand, when using mr and xr they must obviously be used together -- in order to create the range webcatalog uses in its search -- so it only makes sense that webcatalog should not require the group field technique in this case.Perhaps this is one situation where you can actually use two search parameters on the same database field without having to use the group field technique. The only other one I have heard of is when using the cl operator, which I doubt anyone uses anyways.If you actually take a look at the way the cl operator has to be used, you will see that it is inconsistent with the way all other search parameters are used. When the cl operator is used, it absolutely *requires* that the two parameters using the cl prefix appear in the proper order within the search context -- or the results will be very different.Nowhere else in the webdna language does the order of the search parameters matter to webcatalog!================================ Kenneth Grome, WebDNA Consultant 808-737-6499 http://webdna.net ================================------------------------------------------------------------- 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
Kenneth Grome
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:
Where is eudora plugin? (1998)
Removing [showif] makes a big difference in speed (1997)
carriage returns in data (1997)
re: [addlineitem] working almost (1997)
emailer settings and control questions (1997)
GrandTotal not right (1997)
Execute Applescript (1997)
TaxTotal (2003)
WebCatalog stalls (1998)
[WebDNA] COMMITDATABASE in linux unix 64bits FastCGI version 8.6 (2020)
shipping calculations, lookup command (1997)
Emailer (1997)
Million product store (2003)
RE: Ongoing group search problems ... (1997)
Quiz question: Return all green and blank records? (2001)
WebCat2b15MacPlugin - showing [math] (1997)
send mail problem? (1997)
Math (1997)
Credit Card Number Stripping Digit (1997)
emailer setup (1997)