Proposed FormType changes

Shawn Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:

> Note that the changes to DATE may have broken some test cases as they 
> report failures on my machine (TestDateValidator and 
> TestDateRangeValidator). This is apparently because a date in the format 
> "yyyy-MM-dd" is now considered valid when it wasn't previously. Can 
> someone verify that?

Well, shouldn't it be considered valid?  It is an ISO standard.  See

http://www.saqqara.demon.co.uk/datefmt.htm

for reasons why you (and everyone else) should be using CCYY-MM-DD
format.

James Graves, CTO
Delta Mobile Software 				http://www.deltamobile.com