Actually if the year is null in Google, we use 1902, since that's the earliest full year in the Unix epoch. That way if you look at a year like 1988 you'll still see the person's birthday. I could be convinced to use the current year though (Address book requires a year). Anyone have any opinions on this?
Thanks, Charlie On Jul 8, 8:46 pm, Hun Kim <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks. In addition, if you leave the year a null value in Google, SS uses > '2002' as the default starting year? Should it be at least a 'current-year' > value or something (e.g. 2009)? > > Hun Kim | GH Kim Photography |www.ghkim.com > > > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Larry Hendricks <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Mr. Kim, > > > We'll look into it ASAP. Thanks! > > -- > > Larry Hendricks > > [email protected] > >http://spanningsync.com > > > On Jul 8, 6:07 pm, Hun Kim <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Anyone else notice this in 3.0 beta? > > > > Repro steps: > > > > 1. Set a google contact's birthday to 1/1/2009 (or whatever date). > > > 2. Sync SS, AB contact receives birthday value correctly. > > > 3. Set google contact's birthday to null, basically -- -- ---- (default) > > > again. > > > 4. Sync SS. > > > > Actual results: > > > > The AB contact's birthday value does not disappear as expected. > > > > Expected results: > > > > The AB contact's birthday value should disappear. > > > > Hun Kim | GH Kim Photography |www.ghkim.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Spanning Sync" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spanningsync?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
