Open ehehela opened 1 year ago
Why is this marked as completed? I think, this is a nice feature.
Did you close it, because other tools write the full timestamp there? I am not sure if JabRef can derivate here, because your proposals describes:
date
is a calendar date - and not a RFC timestamp)@koppor Thanks for your attention and reply. Now I use field timestamp to manually mark reading date instead of modificationdate. timestamp works well except that I have to manually add date. Save actions like normalizing date can also work on this field.
According to the principle that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity", I think the issue can be canceled or in low priority.
Saving actions such as normalize date on modificationdate should be excluded or prohibited since it may cause endless loop.
Here is a suggestion to add an optional time format for timestamp field. The default timestamp format is "yyyy-MM-ddTHH:mm:ss". But date like "yyyy-MM-dd" is enough for me. So I think it would be better if we can provide multiple time formats for these fields (see figure below for example).
I have tried to use "normalize date" for "modificationdate" field when saving, but it got stuck into loop. Once the normalization action is triggered, a new time "yyyy-MM-ddTHH:mm:ss" is filled into "modificationdate" field.