Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update API documentation to reflect current behaviour: #79

Open
anjackson opened this issue Dec 7, 2017 · 1 comment
Open

Update API documentation to reflect current behaviour: #79

anjackson opened this issue Dec 7, 2017 · 1 comment
Labels

Comments

@anjackson
Copy link
Member

AFAICT, this is wrong:

/**
* Get the time when the record was created.
* @return Date in 14 digit time format (UTC).
* @see org.archive.util.ArchiveUtils#parse14DigitDate(String)
*/
public abstract String getDate();

The implementations appear to generate full ISO datetime stamps, i.e. 2011-02-17T06:59:50Z rather than the implied 20110217065950 (although I think older version of the code did do that).

@anjackson anjackson added the bug label Dec 7, 2017
@ldko
Copy link
Member

ldko commented Feb 10, 2018

From what I interpret, ArchiveRecordHeader is used for both ARCs and WARCs mostly on the reading of records side of things, so sometimes it returns the 20110217065950 format and sometimes the 2011-02-17T06:59:50Z format. In ArchiveUtils for ARCs there is get14DigitDate and for WARCs getLog14Date, so by those names, the "return Date in 14 digit time format (UTC)." description kind of fits in that they both consider themselves to be 14 digits (though W3C/ISO8601 format is 20 characters) vs. the 12 digit and 17 digit date creators that are also in ArchiveUtils (though the "@see org.archive.util.ArchiveUtils#parse14DigitDate(String)" seems misleading). I would be more concerned if that description showed up in WARCRecordInfo where I think the date is being handled for WARCs being written. Let me know if I missed your point entirely. But we can do a PR if you want to change the text.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants