Re: Date search bug?

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

1998

It keeps the original formatting. numero = 17705
interpreted = N
texte = Hi everyone,While I still recommend using the date formatting suggestions I made available a few days ago, there may be some of you who really don't want to mess around with a change-over like that ... so here's some CRITICAL information that may help to make your existing date range searches work properly:The following exchange occurred between myself and Grant after I sent him some files that demonstrated the date range search bug I discovered:>>Have you or anyone tracked down the date bug with those files I sent you a>>couple days ago?>>It appears to be the comma between the dates in the range. I removed the>comma and got much better-looking results. Sorry about the delay and the>misinformation.Basically, what this means is that the HTML docs are wrong -- you should NOT use a comma to separate the two values in a date range search. Instead, you should try using a blank space (or possibly a plus sign) to separate the two date values.I still don't know whether or not the earliest date value in a date range search needs to be listed first -- or if the order makes no difference. But putting the earliest date value first has eliminated problems reported with some earlier versions of WebCatalog, so it's probably still a good idea to continue that practice, just to be on the safe side ... :)Sincerely,Ken Grome808-737-6499WebDNA Solutionsmailto:ken@webdna.nethttp://www.webdna.net Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

Re: Date search bug? (Kenneth Grome 1998)

Hi everyone,While I still recommend using the date formatting suggestions I made available a few days ago, there may be some of you who really don't want to mess around with a change-over like that ... so here's some CRITICAL information that may help to make your existing date range searches work properly:The following exchange occurred between myself and Grant after I sent him some files that demonstrated the date range search bug I discovered:>>Have you or anyone tracked down the date bug with those files I sent you a>>couple days ago?>>It appears to be the comma between the dates in the range. I removed the>comma and got much better-looking results. Sorry about the delay and the>misinformation.Basically, what this means is that the HTML docs are wrong -- you should NOT use a comma to separate the two values in a date range search. Instead, you should try using a blank space (or possibly a plus sign) to separate the two date values.I still don't know whether or not the earliest date value in a date range search needs to be listed first -- or if the order makes no difference. But putting the earliest date value first has eliminated problems reported with some earlier versions of WebCatalog, so it's probably still a good idea to continue that practice, just to be on the safe side ... :)Sincerely,Ken Grome808-737-6499WebDNA Solutionsmailto:ken@webdna.nethttp://www.webdna.net Kenneth Grome

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

[WebDNA] Script choking on POP download (2010) Opinion: [input] should be called [output] ... (1997) Any problem putting ALL dbs in Globals folder? (2000) Emailer (1998) Sku numbers (1997) MacActivity and PCS (1997) watch out for format_to_days on NT (1997) Sending order notification by fax (1999) OT - good CC processor(s)? (1999) PowerKey and PageSentry not playing nice (2000) mass mailing (1998) SiteCheck & WebCat ? (1997) Date or time comparisons have bugs ... (1998) Using Applescript to process WebCatalog functions (1998) Webcat run amuk (2002) DreamWeaver MX Bug (2002) WebCat2.0 [format thousands .0f] no go (1997) serial number generation (1997) Using Cookie for client specific info? (1997) RE: Webcatalog and CyberSTUD (1998)