<i18n dev> RFR: 8319986: Invalid/inconsistent description and example for DateFormat [v2]

[Naoto Sato]

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 01:41:15 GMT, Joe Wang <joehw at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Reflects review comments
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/text/DateFormat.java line 120:
> 
>> 118:  * result; from {@link #SHORT} to {@link #MEDIUM} to {@link #LONG} to {@link #FULL}. The exact result depends
>> 119:  * on the locale, but generally:
>> 120:  * <ul><li>{@link #SHORT} is the shortest and mainly numeric, such as {@code 12.13.52} or {@code 3:30pm}
> 
> Not sure if we want to update the descriptions of all options, but if we want to be consistent, here's a suggestion, how about:
>   {@link #SHORT} is a concise format using numeric digits, for example, {@code 12.13.52} or {@code 3:30pm}
>   {@link #MEDIUM} provides more detail, such as {@code Jan 12, 1952}
>   {@link #LONG} is a comprehensive format, such as {@code January 12, 1952} or {@code 3:30:32pm}
>   {@link #FULL} provides a complete date representation, such as
>   
>   "pretty completely" is a bit casual :-)

Thanks for the feedback, Joe. I think I would rather keep the description somewhat abstract, simply mentioning the formatted output is `SHORT` <= `MEDIUM` <= `LONG` <= `FULL` in length-wise. As it is noted in the previous sentence, it is pretty much locale-dependent.
I simply replaced that casual wording with "the longest" for consistency.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16645#discussion_r1392948818