Right. I was just saying that, it's one thing to explicitly add functionality, but it's another thing to silently alter the default assumptions.
- Brendan -----Original Message----- From: Volker Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 4:00 PM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: Re: curious problem with dates Yes this is correct, but the difference is between tomahawk and JSF spec components than. CONNER, BRENDAN (SBCSI) wrote: > Oh. I was under the impression that the sandbox stuff was just a > preliminary step to going to Tomahawk. Sorry. > > - Brendan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Volker Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 3:54 PM > To: MyFaces Discussion > Subject: Re: curious problem with dates > > > Hi, > > CONNER, BRENDAN (SBCSI) wrote: > >>Sounds good, except that, if the JSF spec says to use GMT by default, >>shouldn't we keep that as the default, to be consistent with it and >>avoid confusion among people using different implementations? >> >>Maybe we should add support for allowing the user to specify using the >>"server" time zone by setting an attribute value? >> > > > Switching between <f:convertDateTime .... /> (JSF spec) > and <s:convertDateTime .... /> (sandbox) gives the user exactly this > ability. > > >>- Brendan >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Travis Reeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 1:43 PM >>To: MyFaces Discussion >>Subject: Re: curious problem with dates >> >> >>Hi all, >> >>I just checked in a sandbox converter for this that uses >>TimeZone.getDefault() for default timezone instead of GMT. Used same >>as core, but in the sandbox namespace. >> >><s:convertDateTime .... /> >> >>Travis >> > > > Regards > Volker -- Don't answer to From: address! Mail to this account are droped if not recieved via mailinglist. To contact me direct create the mail address by concatenating my forename to my senders domain.
