TMG-L ArchivesArchiver > TMG > 2003-07 > 1059301994
From: Michael Slaughter <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Dates not displaying correctly
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 06:33:14 -0400
These dates are input exactly as they appear in the original source. In this
instance this is a rare book, since the original records no longer exist. My
point is, if TMG supports EST dates and irregular dates, why did it change
all my date formats during import, and why would it change EST dates to
AFTER. There's a big difference there. I just imported 7,500 people -- 20+
years of well-documented work and in one minute, TMG trashed it!!
> MS> Per the instructions in online help (Date Format:Old Style Dates), I put
> MS> in the format, 01 Jul 1725/26. TMG changes the date to 01 Jul 1725-___ ___
> MS> 1726 and shows bt 1725-1726 in the Details window.
> You're confusing Julian dates and double dating. Double dating has to
> do with the confusion resulting from changing the start of the year
> from March 25 to January 1. In this case, a date in January, February
> or March would be ambiguous if you didn't know which year start date
> was being used. So, 01 Feb 1725/26 would mean 01 Feb 1725 when January
> 1 is used as the start of the year or, 01 Feb 1726 when March 25 is
> used as the start of the year.
> Using double dating in July, however, makes no sense as, 01 Jul 1725
> is the same regardless of whether the year started on Jan 1 or Mar 25.
> The date 01 Jul 1725/26 is ambiguous; if you want to enter it exactly
> like that, you'll have to enter it as an irregular date by putting
> quotes around it because it can't be resolved to a real regular date.
> ==== TMG Mailing List ====
> To un-subscribe from TMG-D (in DIGEST mode), send a message to
> <> with just the word "unsubscribe" (no quotes)in
> the text and turn off your signature.
|Re: [TMG] Dates not displaying correctly by Michael Slaughter <>|