Upgrade Storage4 digit year not enough
Hi,
I'd like to see the year field changed to allow for more than 4 characters, which is overly restrictive. For me, the problem is that not all documents--even printed ones--can be dated with certainty. We still need to cite the year in a way that will alert the reader, so I often need to enter years that won't fit, like this:
ca. 1576
1923?
ca. 1575-80
etc.
Additionally, I encounter some book series that span multiple years of issue, and get cited with a date range. Perhaps people working on the ancient world (or distant future?) have similar issues.
Thank you
I'd like to see the year field changed to allow for more than 4 characters, which is overly restrictive. For me, the problem is that not all documents--even printed ones--can be dated with certainty. We still need to cite the year in a way that will alert the reader, so I often need to enter years that won't fit, like this:
ca. 1576
1923?
ca. 1575-80
etc.
Additionally, I encounter some book series that span multiple years of issue, and get cited with a date range. Perhaps people working on the ancient world (or distant future?) have similar issues.
Thank you
-
bdarcusI recently came across a new extended date-time datatype from the LOC, which might be appropriate for these cases; better (at least internally) than using free text like "ca. " and such.
-
MG6edited August 7, 2009At least it stores the "extra" information, in the meantime. That's good.
-
SimonCropperI also use date ranges but in a different way. I use a range for book series, e.g. Harden, G. J. (ed.) (1990-1993) "Flora of New South Wales" 4 Volumes (New South Wales University Press: Kensington: New South Wales).