https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=170107
ady <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://docs.oasis-open.org | |/office/OpenDocument/v1.4/O | |penDocument-v1.4-part4-form | |ula.html#VALUE CC| |[email protected] Status|REOPENED |NEW Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #4 from ady <[email protected]> --- Although attachment 204779 is not a good example (as cells C4:C10 are formatted as Dates, not as Text), I have always considered this issue to be some kind of bug (or lack of adequate / complete implementation). For instance, a date pattern such as "DD mmm YYYY" (in Text format) is supposed to be accepted according to: <https://docs.oasis-open.org/office/OpenDocument/v1.4/OpenDocument-v1.4-part4-formula.html#VALUE> (where the DATEVALUE section of the document points to see the Date patterns to be accepted). There are _many_ patterns that the OASIS doc mentions but LO Calc does not accept (Error:502). This is not about the Date acceptance pattern in LO's Options either. I think users should not be required to manually add each and every possible (alternative, equivalent) pattern to the "Date pattern acceptance" setting (in Options > Languages and Locales) that the DATEVALUE and VALUE function(s) are supposed to accept, since these patterns are Text, which is different than telling Calc which pattern it should automatically recognize as dates. To be clear, the problem is not that you cannot import such patterns into Calc (which, you can), but that the DATEVALUE (and VALUE) functions don't parse them as valid dates (in text format) as they should according to the ODF standard. Also, Excel has nothing to do with this (other than improving compatibility with other spreadsheet tools). The subject of this bug report should be modified accordingly. I am therefore changing this issue to Enhancement Request, although this report might be a duplicate of some other older request that might specify each and every date pattern that DATEVALUE is currently not supporting, but it should according to the ODF standard. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
