citeproc-0.14.1: test/csl/date_VariousInvalidDates.txt
>>===== MODE =====>>
citation
<<===== MODE =====<<
>>==== DESCRIPTION ====>>
This depends on correct handling of seasons expressed in month parts per the
discussion at
https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/edtf-and-date-representation/1663
Additionally, it depends on further, special handling for month values 17 and
18 per the code comment at
https://github.com/Juris-M/citeproc-js/blob/master/src/node_datepart.js#L249
which describes seasons derived from months "with a value of 13, 14, 15, 16,
or (to allow correct ranging with Down Under dates) 17 or 18."
This test is also described in
https://github.com/zotero/citeproc-rs/blob/master/crates/citeproc/tests/data/snapshot.txt#L60
<<==== DESCRIPTION ====<<
>>===== RESULT =====>>
Date: (); Date: (Spring); Date: (Spring); Date: (); Date: (Winter)
<<===== RESULT =====<<
>>===== CSL =====>>
<style
xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl"
class="note"
version="1.0">
<info>
<id />
<title />
<updated>2009-08-10T04:49:00+09:00</updated>
</info>
<citation>
<layout delimiter="; ">
<text value="Date: ("/>
<date variable="issued">
<date-part name="month" form="long" strip-periods="true"/>
</date>
<text value=")"/>
</layout>
</citation>
</style>
<<===== CSL =====<<
>>===== INPUT =====>>
[
{
"id": "ITEM-1",
"issued": {
"date-parts": [
[
1965,
-1,
1
]
]
},
"type": "book"
},
{
"id": "ITEM-2",
"issued": {
"date-parts": [
[
1965,
13,
1
]
]
},
"type": "book"
},
{
"id": "ITEM-3",
"issued": {
"date-parts": [
[
1965,
17,
1
]
]
},
"type": "book"
},
{
"id": "ITEM-4",
"issued": {
"date-parts": [
[
1965,
60,
1
]
]
},
"type": "book"
},
{
"id": "ITEM-5",
"issued": {
"date-parts": [
[
1965,
24,
0
]
]
},
"type": "book"
}
]
<<===== INPUT =====<<
>>===== VERSION =====>>
1.0
<<===== VERSION =====<<