You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Whilst the spec technically requires that the DATE of a timestamp is in the format YYYY-MM-DD DAYNAME - Org itself accepts timestamps without the day name, e.g., [2021-06-27]. It could be useful to allow this format.
Potentially (and I haven't looked into whether this already exists), we could have a system where you can specify whether the parser should be strict to the spec, or whether it can allow additional formats e.g., for dates.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Whilst the spec technically requires that the
DATE
of a timestamp is in the formatYYYY-MM-DD DAYNAME
- Org itself accepts timestamps without the day name, e.g.,[2021-06-27]
. It could be useful to allow this format.Potentially (and I haven't looked into whether this already exists), we could have a system where you can specify whether the parser should be strict to the spec, or whether it can allow additional formats e.g., for dates.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: