<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Clarify clock time (HH:MM, MM:SS, ...) and duration time ([HH]:MM, [MM]:SS, ...) formatting in help; (ignore the MM month vs minute discussion)"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127170#c8">Comment # 8</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Clarify clock time (HH:MM, MM:SS, ...) and duration time ([HH]:MM, [MM]:SS, ...) formatting in help; (ignore the MM month vs minute discussion)"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127170">bug 127170</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:mikekaganski@hotmail.com" title="Mike Kaganski <mikekaganski@hotmail.com>"> <span class="fn">Mike Kaganski</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Albrecht Müller from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=127170#c6">comment #6</a>)
<span class="quote">> 2) As there is an easy way to get DURATION kind of rounding if you have
> CLOCK type rounding there is no need to implement a DURATION kind of
> rounding. Maybe a hint in the help information is enough.</span >
This is totally wrong. That "easy way" meant for *display purposes* breaks the
actual data. Modifying the data just to make display correct is plain wrong.
Just forget about this, and accept the correct difference in the definition of
wall clock and time duration. They are inherently different.
The decision on minimal precision is useful though IMO.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>