HCL Domino Ideas Portal

Welcome to the #dominoforever Product Ideas Forum! The place where you can submit product ideas and enhancement request. We encourage you to participate by voting on, commenting on, and creating new ideas. All new ideas will be evaluated by HCL Product Management & Engineering teams, and the next steps will be communicated. While not all submitted ideas will be executed upon, community feedback will play a key role in influencing which ideas are and when they will be implemented.

For more information and upcoming events around #dominoforever, please visit our Destination Domino Page

Add a new idea Subscribe
Status Needs Review
Workspace Domino Designer
Categories @Formulas
Created by Guest
Created on Jun 29, 2022

RELATED IDEAS

One item but different values in LS and Formula (date/time)

If you create a date/time item and write the year "0022", LotusScript interprets it as "2022" but Formula Language interprets it as "22". Because of this, you can't validate the item value properly by LotusScript and rely on the right value when you use it in views and so on by Formula Language.

I would suggest that

  • the (displayed) item value should be converted automatically to "2022" if the item is configured to show a 4-digit-year

  • Formula Language should interepret the value the same way as LotusScript

datetime1.png
datetime2.png
datetime1.png
datetime2.png
datetime1.png datetime2.png
  • Attach files
      Drop here to upload
    • Guest
      Reply
      |       Jul 26, 2023

      Dear Thomas, unfortunately the support could't really help me. So I try again to show my problem here with three examples, all built up like:

      a. User Input in a date/time field.

      b. Displayed Value in the UI document (after the value has been "converted" to 4 digits by the field)

      c. Item Value in the document properties box

      d. item.Values(0) in LotusScript


      Example 1

      a. 01.01.22

      b. 01.01.2022

      c. 01.01.2022

      d. 01.01.2022

      --> everything is fine


      Example 2

      a. 01.01.022

      b. 01.01.0022

      c. 01.01.0022

      d. 01.01.2022

      --> Why aren't values b., c. and d. equal?


      Example 3

      a. 01.01.0022

      b. 01.01.0022

      c. 01.01.0022

      d. 01.01.2022

      --> Why aren't values b., c. and d. equal?


      This is simply inconsistent. I don't even care how it is solved as long as all values do follow the same logic.

    • Guest
      Reply
      |       Jul 20, 2023

      Alright, so now it is case CS0409077.

    • Admin
      Thomas Hampel
      Reply
      |       Jul 6, 2023

      Can you please open a support ticket for this problem?

    • Guest
      Reply
      |       Jun 29, 2022

      A bit of advice: change your logic on the field to prevent two-digit years. LotusScript was changed in 1990s to interpret any two-digit year < 51 as 1900s, and any two-digit year > 50 as 2000s. If the date had been entered as 01.06.51 the year you would get would have been "1951" in LotusScript and "51" in Formula Language. I have no idea what will happen with that LotusScript logic as we approach 2050, I would not be prepared to guess.

      If you want to use a four-digit year in your application (or might want to use the value as a date externally at any point in the future), force it on input via validation or input translation.

    Copyright © 2023 HCL Technologies Limited