Re: Quick Fix for DateTime::Format::W3CDTF

2006-03-06 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Sun, 5 Mar 2006, Tatsuhiko Miyagawa wrote: It's not rolled in, but the D::F::Builder just has W3CDTF.pm in examples/ directory to show how you can reimplement W3CDTF using Builder framework, at least it looks like. Right, but that is just an example. AFAIC, the official version is the one

Re: Quick Fix for DateTime::Format::W3CDTF

2006-03-05 Thread Dave Rolsky
On Sat, 4 Mar 2006, kellan wrote: On 3/4/06, Tatsuhiko Miyagawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1997-07-16T19:20:30.45+01:00 is a valid W3CDTF format but D::F::W3CDTF thinks it's invalid. Here's a quick'n nasty patch. On a related note the existence of two D::F::W3CDTF's on CPAN causes a certain

Re: Quick Fix for DateTime::Format::W3CDTF

2006-03-05 Thread Tatsuhiko Miyagawa
It's not rolled in, but the D::F::Builder just has W3CDTF.pm in examples/ directory to show how you can reimplement W3CDTF using Builder framework, at least it looks like. On 3/5/06, Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 4 Mar 2006, kellan wrote: On 3/4/06, Tatsuhiko Miyagawa [EMAIL

Re: Quick Fix for DateTime::Format::W3CDTF

2006-03-04 Thread kellan
On 3/4/06, Tatsuhiko Miyagawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1997-07-16T19:20:30.45+01:00 is a valid W3CDTF format but D::F::W3CDTF thinks it's invalid. Here's a quick'n nasty patch. On a related note the existence of two D::F::W3CDTF's on CPAN causes a certain amount of confusion. There is my