|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Data YYMMDD or YYYYMMDD
Several list subscribers have written regarding compatibility of these
formats. I uncovered this while working on similar issues-
This is quoted from OmegaResearch DocumentID: 92
Last Updated on: 01/03/2000
<<ASCII File Characteristics for Products with Year 2000 Patch Installed
Dates can be presented in Y2K compliant formats and/or Y2K non-compliant
format. You can only use slashes or dashes to separate the day, month, &
year. And, if you use slashes or dashes, you don’t have to use the zeros
(i.e., 01 can be 1, 02 can be 2, and so on).
Y2K Compliant Format Examples
MMDDYYYY 01271996 or 01/27/1996 or 1-27-1996
DDMMYYYY 27011996 or 27/01/1996 or 27-1-1996
MMYYYYDD 01199627 or 01/1996/27 or 1-1996-27
DDYYYYMM 27199601 or 27/1996/01 or 27-1996-1
YYYYDDMM 19962701 or 1996/27/01 or 1996-27-1
Y2K Non-compliant Formats Examples
MMDDYY 012796 or 01/27/96 or 1-27-96
DDMMYY 270196 or 27/01/96 or 27-1-96
MMYYDD 019627 or 01/96/27 or 1-96-27
DDYYMM 279601 or 27/96/01 or 27-96-1
YYDDMM 962701 or 96/27/01 or 96-27-1
Y2K non-compliant dates are interpreted based on the following algorithm:
Years 00-20 = 2,000 numbers (e.g., 01 = 2001)
Years 21-99 = 1,900 numbers (e.g., 98 = 1998)>>EOQ
I was promised that my current EOD data in YYMMDD format would be readable if
I would upgrade from SC3 to SC4
So far this promise hasn't been fulfilled, but if others experiencing similar
problems will join me in writing to Omega, perhaps a patch could be written
to interpret these formats.
Yes, I know there's probably not a snowball's chance in Hell they'll write
the patch, but at least the attempt will be made.
Be well all,
Bob
|