Hi Michael, On Thursday, 2011-12-01 21:12:48 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
I don't insist on keeping the ^+ thing in, maybe it's better to remove that part and check for W3C compliance. I'm unbiased there.hmm... even ODF 1.0 referred to XMLSchema; i've taken a quick look at the OOoXML format: http://xml.openoffice.org/xml_specification.pdf but that doesn't seem to mention where the datatypes are from... perhaps we don't import anything with ISO8601 dates?
Indeed we don't, except in the OpenFormula namespace for textual arguments of date related funtions. I now reintroduced W3C compliance in the sax parser and the check against ^+ in unit test.
(i'm assuming that OOXML has its own date format re-invented from scratch, like everything else
You might start laughing but ... they store the internal serial date number (which Calc also does), but not the actual date representation, that's only available by calculating from the null date. So a simple viewer without some date recalculation capabilities is not possible.
and with special support for 1900-02-29 :)
Should be "1900-02-28++" ;-) Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. GnuPG key 0x293C05FD : 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
Attachment:
pgpbtHxbrx6kR.pgp
Description: PGP signature