You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
11900102-2384 -> invalid because it needs + to indicate over 100 years of age, also im thinking 1800 should be a cutoff.
119001022384 would also be an acceptable format, but not pass due to 1800 cutoff (1190 is YYYY)
5505260017 -> valid because - is optional
198902255630 -> valid because - is optional
19781204+0009 -> invalid because + indicates age is over 100 years
19200102-0755 -> invalid because - indicates the age is under 100 years
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I wonder if the - and + gets assigned only once during creation, and gets updated after a person turns 100 to make it accurate after they roll over 100 mark. I bet that doesn't happen often, most people don't live that long. 🤔
What happens to old records that were accurate at the time of entry with - but not today, as many years have passed and rolled them over 100 mark.
Probably explains why they are optional and use full year.
I've been working on this... It makes sense to "fix" the year to 4 digits and perform all validation after that. Not "stress" over the +- difference for the long form version.
https://swedish.identityinfo.net/personalidentitynumber
The format states the [-+] are optional.
+
to indicate over 100 years of age, also im thinking 1800 should be a cutoff.119001022384 would also be an acceptable format, but not pass due to 1800 cutoff (1190 is YYYY)
-
is optional-
is optional+
indicates age is over 100 years-
indicates the age is under 100 yearsThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: