Jean-Baptiste Quenot wrote: > * Marc Portier: >> >> Jean-Baptiste Quenot wrote: >>> * Marc Portier: >>> >>>> Coming back to that original date issue in fact I'm afraid >>>> I don't get it yet completely? At which time is this >>>> 'org.w3c.util.DateParser' active? How does this become a >>>> problem of the binding? >>> CForms was generating <date></date>, which is not a valid date. >>> It is interpreted as time 0. This is when binding a date widget. >> Well, I still don't get it >> >> Not a valid date for who? Some back-end processing the xml afterwards? >> >> I've just done a small test which shows cforms is perfectly happy to >> bind to some <date /> or <date></date> in the xml... > > OK, and then, what is the date displayed? Say for example the > date is an optional field. You leave it blank, the XML is saved > with empty tag, and then you edit it again. What is displayed? >
an empty input-box, and quite unsurprisingly too! >> I also find no references to this mentioned org.w3c.util.DateParser in >> the cocoon code-base, I couldn't even find it in any of the jars we >> distribute... (actually outside cocoon the only references I've found >> to it so far are jigsaw and some css-validator) > > This is part of another patch, see > Add support for ISO8601 in I18nTransformer and Forms > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COCOON-1648 ah, thx, for explaining, but: that patch is not applied, is it? The issue is still open? and to clarify my results, guess what: my test isn't using i18n. Put rather bluntly, here is my current understanding: The argumentation of the fix, namely to make the value-binding remove an element upon 'save' seems, currently, to be that this avoids after re-'load' some weird formatting result (from "" to "1/1/1970") in the i18n transformer caused by some external date-parser suggested in a patch that isn't applied? And even if it would be in the codebase: what if people use this i18n transformer without cforms or the binding framework? What if the XML was never saved before, but just has an empty date element in there? what else am I missing here? -marc= (puzzled) -- Marc Portier http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/mpo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
