+1, although what IS_TIME does (e.g. 0-24 for hours, 1-12 if am-pm is
there, 0-60 for minutes, etc) fills all possible "requirements" for a
single input.
"""
> and in another field I want to accept time format of form ("hours:minutes"
> to "hours:minutes").
>
"""
What the user asked for I think is a duration, not "time":
- totally different concept
- needs a custom validator
- can only be stored as a string (or an integer storing the difference
bewteen in seconds)
- and must be parsed externally to return a timedelta
On Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:53:56 PM UTC+2, villas wrote:
>
> In my experience a time field is more or less useless and you may as well
> store the time as a string. I think everyone else may feel the same,
> which is why IS_TIME still has no format validation even after 5 years.
>
> If you don't want to store as a string, then if I were you, I would
> store as datetime and just have the same default date in every datetime
> field. It isn't difficult to discard the unwanted date.
>
> However, maybe others have a different view...
>
>
--
