To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=42452
User er changed the following:
What |Old value |New value
================================================================================
CC|'' |'er'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assigned to|spreadsheet |khong
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue type|PATCH |DEFECT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS/Version|Windows XP |All
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Platform|PC |All
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Feb 11 04:28:10 -0800
2005 -------
Hi Shimshon,
There are two issues with the dates entered in the attached sample document:
1. Dates entered may not be correctly processed if they point before the
Gregorian calendar reformation, which is 1582-10-15, as there are several
different ways to calculate those, depending on what area you choose and when
the reformation happened in that specific area. It may be that your table/tool
chose a different approach than OOo.
2. AFAIK there are also different ways to calculate the Hijri calendar, I'm not
sure if there even is _the_ one and only algorithm to do it. For example, also
http://www.rabiah.com/convert/ mentions "There is a small probability of one day
error", and in fact for the newer dates has one date offset from your "external
calendar program", but gives identical results for older dates. That site, btw,
delivers identical results as http://www.islamicfinder.org/Hcal/index.php. On
the other hand, http://www.fourmilab.com/documents/calendar/ delivers identical
results to yours.
Could you please provide some pointers to what algorithm was used in your
comparison? Thanks.
Karl,
As you implemented the calendars I assign this issue to you. Note that it is
still unconfirmed and doesn't have a target set. Am I right in my previous
assumptions about different algorithms, or is there a real miscalculation in our
implementation? Is one of the other algorithms better than OOo's?
Thanks
Eike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
