OK, I'll check it out.  Thanks.

---sam


On 12/19/06, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not sure if this helps but:

-) The tacos DatePicker component uses a completely separate
javascript package for the actual picker (that is used by a lot of
people, even our jira instance) so I would be surprised if it hadn't
somehow figured these issues out already.

-) The new DropdownDatePicker / DropdownTimePicker components should
be fairly bulletproof in this regard as the ibm guy who works on
anything i18n related in Dojo ~only~ works on and cares about i18n .
The dates/times are transported according to rfc3339 (i think..) so
anything appearing in local time should just be for appearances and
not for actual client->server sync.

On 12/19/06, Sam Gendler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm only just starting to look into this problem, so I'll likely post
> more detail in future emails, but it looks as though there is a
> problem with the DatePicker component when the server and the client
> are not in the same timezone.  Internally, the Calendar javascript
> object that is defined in DatePIcker.js uses an offset from Jan 1,
> 1970 GMT to store the date, which is fine, since it is independant of
> timezone.  The visual calendar element then displays with the selected
> date computed including the local zimezone on the browser machine.
> This wouldn't by itself, be a huge problem, except that the initial
> value in the text box is displayed according to the timezone on the
> server.  So if my server is in GMT+1 and it creates a DatePicker using
> a date of Dec 20, 2006, the DatePicker text box will display
> 12/20/2006 (or whatever the appropriate format is).  When I click on
> the calendar icon from a browser in GMT-8, however, the resulting
> calendar actually displays with Dec 19 selected, even though the text
> box shows Dec 20.  If I print the value of the date in a js debug
> statement, it will actually show 15:00 on Dec 19, which is 9 hours
> back from 00:00 on Dec 20.  If I then select Dec 20 on the calendar,
> the text box will continue to display Dec 20, but now there will be 24
> hours added to the associated date object, meaning it will display
> 15:00 on Dec 20, which isn't really what I wanted (prefer 00:00 on Dec
> 20).
>
> If the component is going to compute timezone offsets, it should
> continue to compute them with newly selected dates, rather than just
> with the default values.  Also, the original value needs to have the
> same computation applied to it. More importantly, I don't really think
> it should be doing timezone computations at all unless I ask it to
> (and I don't see anything obvious in the javascript that would let me
> toggle it).  Finally, since it is a calendar object that does not
> provide a mechanism for setting time, it should be truncating values
> to only include the date.
>
> Does anyone know a way that I can use the DatePicker with 'raw'
> values, meaning it should convert the supplied date to unixtime within
> the browser time zone, rather than on the server?  This is causing me
> big headaches since I've got users in 6 widely disparate timezones and
> asking them all to set their desktop machines to use GMT just isn't
> reasonable.  Does the tacos DatePicker behave differently in this
> regard?  In our case, it is understood that all dates are server time,
> so it is a problem that the component is converting to local time.
>
> --sam
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


--
Jesse Kuhnert
Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer

Open source based consulting work centered around
dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to