Re: date formats

["Greg Ferguson" <gferg@hoop.timonium.sgi.com>]

On Dec 7,  4:40pm, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> Subject: Re: date formats
> > As long as we are assured it's YYYY-MM-DD and not YYYY-DD-MM.
> > I'd advocate using "DD MMM YYYY", where MMM = {Jan, Feb, etc};
> > no descrepency or confusion.
>
> Hmm. YYYY-MM-DD is defined as a date standard in ISO8601. Every other
> convention has strong regional usage or language variants which may make
> them less suitable for world-class docs.
>
> The whole dust up over Y2K probably raised people's awareness of the
> yyyy-mm-dd convention (which was not generally used in everyday
> situations in the US, for example) and it should cause no confusion.

Yes, you (and David) are correct. Sorry for the confusion.
YYYY-MM-DD appears to be the correct date format for us to use.

r,

-- 
Greg Ferguson     - s/w engr / mtlhd         | gferg at sgi.com
SGI Tech Pubs     - http://techpubs.sgi.com/ |
Linux Doc Project - http://www.linuxdoc.org/ | gferg at metalab.unc.edu


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org