Rainmeter Forums

JCR255 wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2022, 7:25 am Yes mine also stopped working today.
I'm using Weather.com JSMorley, etc., dated Aug 2, 2020.

I'm noticing in the log it says 'Invalid Time Stamp Format'
and under @Current Observation Date it's Jan 1, 1601 !?

Are you sure you have indicated the new key? I was getting the same error due to the wrong key.

Current key: https://forum.rainmeter.net/viewtopic.php?t=35770&start=360#p202611
How to: https://forum.rainmeter.net/viewtopic.php?t=35770&start=370#p202634

Are you sure you have indicated the new key? I was getting the same error due to the wrong key.

Oh dang, and I though I searched!

Yeah it's working again, date is correct now, thanks a lot!

sesco wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2022, 12:03 am My weather skin stopped working again. Am I the only one?

Yep, it seems you are. So, here is an idea:
On every skin using WebParser measures like all weather skins, if they stop working, first thing which worth trying is a complete restart of Rainmeter. right click the Rainmeter icon in the Notification Area, click Exit, then restart it from the Start menu. It's a known issue with WebParser measures that sometimes they hang up and in such cases the only possibility to get them working again is a restart of Rainmeter. Some details here.
Obviously this doesn't help if the API key is invalid as for JCR255 above. However if it is alright, a restart might help.

sesco wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2022, 12:03 am My weather skin stopped working again. Am I the only one?

Never mind. I fixed it. For anyone else who might have the same issue ad me, right click on the widget -> Custom skin actions -> Edit weather variables and change the API key to APIKey=21d8a80b3d6b444998a80b3d6b1449d3

I wonder why are there suddenly so many users having wrong API key set?

balala wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2022, 3:28 pm I wonder why are there suddenly so many users having wrong API key set?

Well, not sure if there were "so many" since I only counted two: sesco and JCR255 (and probably someone else in the other weather thread). It also seems they were using a previous version of jsmorley's skin from August 2020 (or the old @include files) that had the old key as a variable. Probably forgot to change it to the new one...

Yincognito wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2022, 3:49 pm Well, not sure if there were "so many" since I only counted two: sesco and JCR255 (and probably someone else in the other weather thread).

And as you thought a third user, bobalazs here.
But the idea is that for more months I saw no one (at least don't remember reading something like this), and now saw three just today.
More or less, it was a rhetorical question.

balala wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2022, 4:03 pmBut the idea is that for more months I saw no one (at least don't remember reading something like this), and now saw three just today.

Yes, indeed. It's odd. But they were all using the old key, as far as I can see (meaning that the new key didn't cause them trouble).

balala wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2022, 4:03 pmMore or less, it was a rhetorical question.

Hopefully rhetorical questions when it comes to weather.com won't lead to them operating some other change in the near future...

Yincognito wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2022, 4:08 pm But they were all using the old key, as far as I can see (meaning that the new key didn't cause them trouble).

Yep, understand, but. The key is not new, it has not been changed right now, but a while ago. So why more users are asking right now these questions?
But finally doesn't matter too much, I guess.

balala wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2022, 6:30 pmThe key is not new, it has not been changed right now, but a while ago. So why more users are asking right now these questions?

Probably reinstalling the older version of the skin on the top of the one with the correct key (which they changed back then, but forgot about it). It doesn't explain why it happened for more users at once, although when it comes to a large number of users, some users doing the same thing at about the same time is statistically possible. Of course, it would be quite a coincidence indeed.