TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2003-01 > 1041547099


From: Linda Gaylord-Kuhn <>
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [TMG] General tags or VERY specific tags?
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 16:38:23 -0600
In-Reply-To: <1247997910.20030102171945@comcast.net>


Hi, Eric ... I strongly agree that "before 1800" and "before 1 Jan 1800"
are NOT equivalent. What I was referring to (in the broader context of
the discussion) was how did TMG v. UFT sort those dates. Both *SORT*
dates end up being ... in UFT ... "12/31/1799". Given that limitation,
the *SORT* dates are equal (not the dates themselves). It's a UFT
limitation; nothing more. Based on it's own limitations, it's sorting
as expected.

Hope that was at least as clear as creek mud. <G>

Linda

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Haas [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 4:20 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re[2]: [TMG] General tags or VERY specific tags?
>
>
> Thursday, January 2, 2003, 2:20:18 PM, you wrote:
>
>
> LGK> UFT TMG
> LGK> ================== =================
> LGK> before 1 Jan 1800 before 1800
> LGK> before 1800 after 1800
> LGK> 1 Jan 1800 before 1 Jan 1800
> LGK> after 1 Jan 1800 1 Jan 1800
> LGK> after 1800 after 1 Jan 1800
>
> LGK> IMHO, UFT is sorting correctly, treating the first two as
identical
> sort
> LGK> dates and had I entered "before 1800" first, it would have
appeared
> LGK> first in the list. Can't ask a program to decide which of two
> identical
> LGK> sort dates should come first ... even *I* won't ask that. <VBG>
>
>
> I have to disagree with your assertion that "before 1800" and "before
> 1 Jan 1800" are identical. They differ in precision, "before 1 Jan
> 1800" is a much more precise specification than "before 1800".
>
>
> ==== TMG Mailing List ====
> The Wholly Genes FAQ page <http://www.whollygenes.com/faq1/fom-
> serve/cache/1.html> has information not only about TMG and how to
obtain
> it, but helpful hints on using it.


This thread: