Don't strip 0 in year completion for issue1370

[yangoon1, 2010-01-10 15:05:40]

Works for 09, but not for 9.

[ced, 2010-01-10 15:10:51]

On 2010/01/10 15:05:40, yangoon wrote:
> Works for 09, but not for 9.

This is the excepted behavior.
When you enter incomplete value in date field, the missing part will be
completed with the current date. So:
9 -> ___9 -> 2019
09 -> __09 ->2009
109 -> _109 -> 2109

[yangoon1, 2010-01-10 16:10:03]

On 2010/01/10 15:10:51, ced wrote:
> On 2010/01/10 15:05:40, yangoon wrote:
> > Works for 09, but not for 9.
> 
> This is the excepted behavior.
> When you enter incomplete value in date field, the missing part will be
> completed with the current date. So:
> 9 -> ___9 -> 2019
> 09 -> __09 ->2009
> 109 -> _109 -> 2109

OOo and IIRC Excel handle an input like 01.01.1 as 01.01.2001, taking 2000 as
base for the completion. It is somewhat more practical for the user and
therefore it was what I expected.

[ced, 2010-01-10 18:22:17]

On 2010/01/10 16:10:03, yangoon wrote:
> On 2010/01/10 15:10:51, ced wrote:
> > On 2010/01/10 15:05:40, yangoon wrote:
> > > Works for 09, but not for 9.
> > 
> > This is the excepted behavior.
> > When you enter incomplete value in date field, the missing part will be
> > completed with the current date. So:
> > 9 -> ___9 -> 2019
> > 09 -> __09 ->2009
> > 109 -> _109 -> 2109
> 
> OOo and IIRC Excel handle an input like 01.01.1 as 01.01.2001, taking 2000 as
> base for the completion. It is somewhat more practical for the user and
> therefore it was what I expected.

Why do you expect to complete with 2000?
What did you expect in previous century?
What do you expect in 2100?

[yangoon1, 2010-01-10 19:31:13]

On 2010/01/10 18:22:17, ced wrote:
> On 2010/01/10 16:10:03, yangoon wrote:
> > On 2010/01/10 15:10:51, ced wrote:
> > > On 2010/01/10 15:05:40, yangoon wrote:
> > > > Works for 09, but not for 9.
> > > 
> > > This is the excepted behavior.
> > > When you enter incomplete value in date field, the missing part will be
> > > completed with the current date. So:
> > > 9 -> ___9 -> 2019
> > > 09 -> __09 ->2009
> > > 109 -> _109 -> 2109
> > 
> > OOo and IIRC Excel handle an input like 01.01.1 as 01.01.2001, taking 2000
as
> > base for the completion. It is somewhat more practical for the user and
> > therefore it was what I expected.
> 
> Why do you expect to complete with 2000?
> What did you expect in previous century?
> What do you expect in 2100?

It is obviously not only me expecting this behaviour since the big office suites
handle it this way.

As I said it is a matter of practical usability, and the logic is different. We
are working today. The millenium in which we are working is 2000. It is just
convenient to take it as the base for fast input.

When Tryton *and* me are still alive in 2100 we should talk about another
change...;)