Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Proposal: Unify ISO8601 terminal names #11

Open
ciozi137 opened this issue Oct 18, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Proposal: Unify ISO8601 terminal names #11

ciozi137 opened this issue Oct 18, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@ciozi137
Copy link
Contributor

Various names are used:
image

  • At minimum it is confusing (eg "ISO8601 Date String" may contain a time)
  • Sometimes the label is incorrect ("ISO8601 UTC DateTime" often is not expressed UTC time)

Proposal:

  • Rename the terminals "ISO8601 DateTime" [I think "ISO8601 Timestamp" is better but this suggests VI names like "ISO8601 Timestamp to Timestamp.vi"]
  • Rename VIs while maintaining deprecated names:
    • ISO8601 DateString.vi --> ISO8601 DateTime to Timestamp.vi
    • Timestamp to ISO8601 UTC DateTime.vi --> Timestamp to ISO8601 DateTime.vi
ciozi137 added a commit to ciozi137/Epoch-Time that referenced this issue Oct 18, 2024
@ciozi137
Issue LabVIEW-Open-Source#11: ISO8601 object names:
4a32135 
- Rename terminals to "ISO8601 DateTime"
- Rename VIs (retain old for backwards compatibility):
   - ISO8601 DateString.vi --> ISO8601 DateTime to Timestamp.vi
   - Timestamp to ISO8601 UTC DateTime.vi --> Timestamp to ISO8601 DateTime.vi
- Update Test Epochs.vi
- Update vipb to reference new methods (also include "Compare ISO8601 Date Times.vi" from pull request LabVIEW-Open-Source#12)
@ciozi137
Copy link
Contributor Author

@francois-normandin just did spot check and I am getting result shown below, but tests are otherwise passing...
Screenshot 2024-10-19 at 1 15 50 PM

@ciozi137
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looks like it is not working if milliseconds are not present.

OK:
Screenshot 2024-10-19 at 1 21 39 PM

Not OK:
Screenshot 2024-10-19 at 1 21 52 PM

@ciozi137 ciozi137 mentioned this issue Oct 19, 2024
Open
@francois-normandin
Copy link
Member

francois-normandin commented Oct 19, 2024 •
edited
Loading

That will need to be corrected. ISO standard supports it, but I assume it is not mandatory?

Can you check if it works with a non-strict validation?

https://www.iso.org/iso-8601-date-and-time-format.html#:~:text=Therefore%2C%20the%20order%20of%20the,minutes%2C%20seconds%2C%20and%20milliseconds.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@francois-normandin @ciozi137