On 1/21/03 10:52 AM, Matt Sergeant wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, John Siracusa wrote: >> On 1/21/03 3:38 AM, H.Merijn Brand wrote: >>> FWIW *if* there should be a default date format for DBI, *please* make it >>> universal: YYYYMMDD and not MMDDYYYY or MM/DD/YYYY, because you have no idea >>> how much irritation this arouses in European countries. >> >> Like I said: >> >>> On 1/20/03 11:34 AM, John Siracusa wrote: >>>> It would be nice if we had a "canonical" date/time representation. That's >>>> part of what the new DateTime modules being discussed on the >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list hope to deliver. >> >> I don't think we'll have a standardized "interchange format" for dates >> until/unless the new DateTime project matures. But such a thing is not >> required for database-independent code, provided you're not trying to move >> data from one database to another. All that's required by my proposal is >> that each DBD's formatter be able to read whatever is returned from its own >> parser: > > Does this cover DBD's (like mine) that don't support *any* data types?
Sure. If you really make no distinctions about data types, then you'd probably just make the methods no-op pass-throughs for the data. -John
