Andreas Junghans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'll adapt the Java implementation to handle numbers that are left out > (currently, only the milliseconds are treated as optional). Looking at the > JavaScript reference, only year and month are mandatory. Should we handle it > the same way (i.e. should we state that an implementation SHOULD be able to > only work with year and month)?
Well I thought we'd best leave it as having none of them optional. You're suggesting that some should be optional. Is there really a reason for that? It's certainly easy enough to implement, but I don't see a significant advantage. > Actually, the month is counted from 0 in JavaScript (don't know where they'd > get that idea from ...). You can also see it in the JSON debug output when > sending the current date. I've changed the server writer's guide accordingly Ok, thanks. > On the subject of leading zeros: they should be disallowed in the > protocol. In JavaScript, a leading zero indicates an octal number, so things > like 08 are technically illegal (and 0777 means 511). Both IE and Firefox > can work with 08 anyway (by not interpreting it as octal if there are > illegal digits like 8). However, Firefox emits a warning in this case, and I > think we should avoid that (and I'm not sure how other browsers handle > this). Good point. I'll clarify it in the guide. Cheers, Derrell Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ qooxdoo-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
