## Why is this an issue?

When creating a `DateTimeFormatter` using the `WeekFields.weekBasedYear()` temporal field, the resulting year number may be off by 1 at the beginning of a new year (when the date to format is in a week that is shared by two consecutive years).

Using this year number in combination with an incompatible week temporal field yields a result that may be confused with the first week of the previous year.

Instead, when paired with a week temporal field, the week-based year should only be used with the week of week-based year temporal field `WeekFields.weekOfWeekBasedYear()`.

Alternatively the temporal field `ChronoField.ALIGNED_WEEK_OF_YEAR` can be used together with a regular year (but not the week based year).

### Noncompliant code example

    new DateTimeFormatterBuilder()
          .appendValue(ChronoField.YEAR, 4) // Noncompliant: using week of week-based year with regular year
          .appendLiteral('-')
          .appendValue(WeekFields.ISO.weekOfWeekBasedYear(), 2)
          .toFormatter();

    new DateTimeFormatterBuilder()
          .appendValue(ChronoField.YEAR_OF_ERA, 4) // Noncompliant: using week of week-based year with regular year
          .appendLiteral('-')
          .appendValue(WeekFields.ISO.weekOfWeekBasedYear(), 2)
          .toFormatter();

    new DateTimeFormatterBuilder()
          .appendValue(WeekFields.ISO.weekBasedYear(), 4) // Noncompliant: using aligned week of year with week-based year
          .appendLiteral('-')
          .appendValue(ChronoField.ALIGNED_WEEK_OF_YEAR, 2)
          .toFormatter();

Here the first two formatters would wrongly format the 1st of January 2016 as "2016-53" while the last one would format it as "2015-01"

### Compliant solution

    new DateTimeFormatterBuilder()
          .appendValue(WeekFields.ISO.weekBasedYear(), 4)
          .appendLiteral('-')
          .appendValue(WeekFields.ISO.weekOfWeekBasedYear(), 2)
          .toFormatter();

    new DateTimeFormatterBuilder()
          .appendValue(ChronoField.YEAR, 4)
          .appendLiteral('-')
          .appendValue(ChronoField.ALIGNED_WEEK_OF_YEAR, 2)
          .toFormatter();

    new DateTimeFormatterBuilder()
          .appendValue(ChronoField.YEAR_OF_ERA, 4)
          .appendLiteral('-')
          .appendValue(ChronoField.ALIGNED_WEEK_OF_YEAR, 2)
          .toFormatter();

Here the first formatter would format the 1st of January 2016 as "2015-53" while the last two would produce "2016-01", both of which are correct depending on how you count the weeks.

### Exceptions

No issue is raised when week-based year is not used in combination with a week temporal field.

Similarly, no issue is raised if week of week-based year is not used in combination with a year temporal field.