[Date Prev][Date Next]
RE: [cdn-nucl-l] re: Year-2001-to-2031 Problem
I like the day / month / year format also -- but in addition, I try to
reduce the confusion by using Roman numerals for the month -- 11-IV-00.
...in the year 2011, April 11, it will NOT be confusing: 11-IV-11 (since
either side is correct), nor will other dates be confusing, unless one is
scheduling things for future years (up to 2031) or refering to past years
(back to 2001).
> From: Philippe Duport[SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Tuesday April 11, 2000 4:27 PM
> To: Brown, Morgan; 'cdn-nucl-l'
> Subject: Re: [cdn-nucl-l] re: Year-2001-to-2031 Problem
> I do not know why, but I like the way dates are numerically noted in
> from short to long: day / month / year. If only we had such a convention!
> Philippe Duport
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brown, Morgan" <email@example.com>
> To: "'cdn-nucl-l'" <firstname.lastname@example.org.McMaster.CA>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 3:50 PM
> Subject: [cdn-nucl-l] re: Year-2001-to-2031 Problem
> > How about we get away from using numbers for months? I never know
> > the second set of digits in 04/11/00 is supposed to be April 11 or
> > 4. Is there a believable and consistent standard? How about we use
> > 11-Apr-2000. And I really dislike "2000 April 11". I was taught to
> > "April 11th, 2000" or "The 11th of April, 2000". How about we keep our
> > ordinal numbers (i.e. the ordered
> > numbers like first, second, etc.)?
> > cheers
> > Morgan (stuck in the mud) Brown
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdn-nucl-l mailing list
> > cdn-nucl-l@mailman.McMaster.CA
> > http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/cdn-nucl-l
> cdn-nucl-l mailing list