[gdal-dev] New config option for date/time output

[Joaquim Luis]

On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 13:01:29 -0000, Ari Jolma <ari.jolma at gmail.com> wrote:

> 15.03.2016, 14:08, Joaquim Luis kirjoitti:
>> GMT uses "yyy-mm-ddT[hh:mm:ss] (Gregorian) or yyyy-Www-ddT[hh:mm:ss]  
>> (ISO)"
>>
>> http://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu/doc/latest/gmt.conf.html#calendar-time-parameters  
>> It would be nice to use the same.
>
> I'm not sure I understand you correctly but strftime can do this:
>
> OGR_DATETIME_FORMAT = "%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S"
>
> gives for example 2016-01-10T08:25:12 and
>
> OGR_DATETIME_FORMAT = "%Y-%W-%dT%H:%M:%S"
>
> gives 2016-01-10T08:25:12 for the same time - 10.1.2016 is on week two  
> (strftime: %W = Week number with the first Monday as the first day of  
> week one (00-53))

Sorry, it was me who misunderstood your question/suggestion. I thought  
that printing with the above format was not possible yet and that's why I  
pointed to what GMT does. But if GDAL can do it already, than sorry for  
the noise.

Joaquim

> I think that there needs to be separate options for date and datetime,  
> i.e., OGR_DATE_FORMAT and OGR_DATETIME_FORMAT.
>
> Ari
>
>>
>> Joaquim
>>
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> The OGRFeature::GetFieldAsString returns date/time fields formatted in  
>>> non-standard way. For example date is output as "year/month/day" as  
>>> more usual "year-month-day". This causes problems in many programs.
>>>
>>> I suggest adding a new config option OGR_DATE_FORMAT, which, if set,  
>>> would make the method return date/time formatted according to it. I  
>>> suggest that we use the strftime and its format argument as the target  
>>> for the new option.
>>>
>>> The implementation is complicated a bit when milliseconds and  
>>> timezones are involved since they are not included in the struct tm  
>>> used by strftime. I suggest that we assume seconds are formatted as  
>>> :\d\d in the format and simply add milliseconds (as .\d\d\d) and  
>>> timezone (as [+-]\d\d(:\d\d)), if they exists, after the second.
>>>
>>> Do you think this needs a RFC?
>>>
>>> I'm willing to implement the changes.
>>>
>>> Ari
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gdal-dev mailing list
>>> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> gdal-dev mailing list
>> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev