Opened 13 years ago
Last modified 10 years ago
#344 accepted defect
Properly localize dates/times
Reported by: | Elrond | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | minor | Milestone: | |
Component: | programming | Keywords: | bitesized |
Cc: | Parent Tickets: |
Description (last modified by )
In the long run GMG should display dates/times in a proper local format. This might involve enhancing the current translations, so that the dates/times are positioned correctly. Useful link: - `http://babel.edgewall.org/wiki/Documentation/dates.html <http://babel.edgewall.org/wiki/Documentation/dates.html>`_
Change History (7)
comment:1 by , 13 years ago
comment:2 by , 12 years ago
Component: | → graphic design/interface |
---|
comment:3 by , 12 years ago
We should actually start to output nicer locallited dates. Or consider on what to do regarding that. And if we output nicer dates, we should locallize them.
Currently our output is quite techy in 2012-12-20 23:59:59
form.
(hinted by ShawnRisk)
comment:4 by , 12 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|---|
Keywords: | bitesized added |
Subtask
In tools/timesince.py
we create nicely formatted time deltas. We should investigate, wether we want to rewrite that in term of the following page:
This investigation itself might be bitesized, tagging.
p.s.: Description not intentionally edited.
comment:5 by , 12 years ago
Component: | graphic design/interface → programming |
---|---|
Priority: | trivial → minor |
comment:6 by , 12 years ago
Keywords: | bitesized removed |
---|
The above subtask depends on unreleased babel features. So this is not a workable subtask. Removing the bitesized tag.
Leaves the question open: What is this bug about anyway? Our timesince is mostly localized, I think, and we use iso dates for the "If you want to know exactly" tooltip, which is fine.
comment:7 by , 10 years ago
Keywords: | bitesized added |
---|
A quick look suggests, that the functionality is now in babel 1.3 (or earlier, no idea. That's the version in debian/testing, and it seems to be in there).
So: We can investigate, wether we want to rewrite our current tooling using that!
The original url for this bug was http://bugs.foocorp.net/issues/696 .