https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=144377
Mike Kaganski <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #8 from Mike Kaganski <[email protected]> --- (In reply to buggymcbug from comment #7) ISO 8601 is not relevant in this discussion. And false premise that you have is that you try to use very generic term "date" as used in many areas of human life, which is largely the topic handled by the ISO 8601, in the discussion of a very specific thing, that is *content of a cell in a spreadsheet*. No, there is *no* "bug in the ODF standard" because of "incompliance" with the ISO 8601. The date in spreadsheet is not just anything that is called "date" by human. It is *by definition* a type of data in a spreadsheet cell; it is defined to be a number; it is specifically defined what that number must designate (a number of days from a specific point); and it has its specific requirements as the rationale for this definition. It deliberately ignores any unrelated notions of human dates, like eras, years, leap seconds, shifts, etc. It is serving a specific goal: provide simple, efficient, and unambiguous way of computations in a mixed environment - where one may use simple numbers in the formula involving dates. It uses proleptic Gregorian calendar for all the covered date range; it has a limited such range (which would be another "incompliance" with general notion of date/time, but is just OK for a spreadsheet standard). And trying to reopen what you had been answered already, trying to push your "I want to use my personal (or even universally human) notion of date in the spreadsheet" is not going to change the fact that this is not a bug. However, I am not inclined to play games here. Let it stay reopened, as the monument for the status change war. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
