Re: Date, Time format


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ SM3A Discussion Board ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Scott Johnson on January 03, 2000 at 13:31:42:

In Reply to: Re: Date, Time format posted by Carleton MacDonald on January 01, 2000 at 20:12:57:

> > Why not adopt the international (ISO 8601) and/or U.S. (ANSI X3.30) STANDARD format when documenting 'time'? These rational standards avoid potintial ambiguities such as the fourth of January/April Fool's Day and they take care of dates such as 01/02/03 in a reliable manner.
> > There is more to "Y2K" than the number of digits in the year!
> > Duncan

>
> Yes, and it might also avoid the humorous "January 1, 19100" as the date
> in this here discussion forum!!

> Carleton MacDonald

You make an assumption of juxtaposition. Why?

1900+99 = 1999

1900+100 = 2000

Not that I'm advocating that this shouldn't be fixed...just wondering
why the conclusions.

Scott



Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ SM3A Discussion Board ] [ FAQ ]