[Ned Freed]:
> do you mean a variable containing the complete
> "2003-05-03T05:03:12.00+02:00" ? (I think I would leave out the
> time zone for this application, actually.)
Yes, that's what I meant.
okay, here's what I got now:
-----
The action setdate initialises a few variables:
${year} => the year, "0000" .. "9999"
${month} => the month, "01" .. "12"
${day} => the day, "01" .. "31"
${hour} => the hour, "00" .. "23"
${minute} => the minute, "00" .. "59"
| ${second} => the second, "00" .. "60",
+ 60 is only used for leap seconds, see [TIMESTAMPS].
+ ${weekday} => the day of week, "1" .. "7",
+ 1 is Monday
+ ${week} => the week, "01" .. "53",
+ numbered according to [ISO8601]
+ ${weekyear} => the year ${week} is part of, "0000" .. "9999",
+ according to [ISO8601]. (e.g, 2000-01-01 is
+ in week 52 of 1999)
+ ${date} => a lexically ordered timestamp. Using the above
+ definitions, it is set to the expansion of
+ "${year}-${month}-${day}T${hour}:${minute}:${second}".
${timezone} => the time zone in use. If the user specified a
time zone which was recognised, ${timezone} will
contain the name given. Otherwise, the value
MUST be the server's default time zone in offset
format.
-----
I changed the name of "isoyear" to "weekyear", I think that's more
accurate. after all, the year in ISO 8601 is the same as ${year}.
it's only in week context it's different.
It isn't clear to me that weeks are referred to by number enough
to matter. At least not in the US.
week numbers are used quite a bit here in Europe.
--
Kjetil T.