Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ISO8601] Re: Reading, Writing, and Speaking ISO 8601

Expand Messages
  • Tex Texin
    I think you came away with the wrong impression. A standard form of expression would be nice. However: 1) This is a forum for discussion of a date standard
    Message 1 of 24 , Dec 30, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I think you came away with the wrong impression.

      A standard form of expression would be nice. However:

      1) This is a forum for discussion of a date standard used for interchange
      between computers.
      You are proposing a different context that is out of scope.
      It is not that it is unimportant, it is just off topic in this forum.
      We pointed to other forums that want to talk about such matters.

      2) This is a forum for an international standard.
      You are proposing forms of expression acceptable to English speaking users,
      which make it non-international and off topic for this forum.

      3) It was noted that people do not have just one form of expression for dates,
      they have many, sometimes context-dependent. Your proposal should take that
      into account. Maybe you can propose one form that works for all contexts and is
      acceptable to people as the only one to use. Perhaps you should consider
      multiple forms that address the reasons people vary their usage today.

      4) You are wrong about time formats being a single format. Besides military vs
      am/pm, other languages such as japanese put the am/pm in front of the time,
      (when they use that format) and other separators are used.
      Also the meaning of 1200 am and 1200pm in particular varies between the US and
      Japan. (It is reversed.)
      Others may chime in with additional cultural differences. But the point is what
      you think is standardized in speech is not. So the problem may be more
      difficult than you estimate and therefore also makes it of less interest to
      this forum, since it not only off-topic, but going to consume a lot of
      bandwidth to clarify the difficulty of the problem.

      5) Exploring what astronomers use is a good idea. Also the other forums for
      such topics.

      I hope that helps. I don't think it was intended to offend or be rude. But the
      guidelines for this forum have been clearly stated a few times and it is also
      rude to pursue off-topic subjects after they have been identified as off-topic.
      After all, all someone has to do is to announce "OK I am going to discuss this
      over in <forum where it is on-topic>" and you get everything you want...

      Hmmm, now how do I say this- Best wishes for 2005? Best wished for two thousand
      and five? Best wishes for two-double ought-five?...

      ;-)



      valximus wrote:
      >
      > In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "BUDAI_AES" <bandi@m...> wrote:
      >
      > > . . .
      > > Did not want to add to it, because my
      > > previous notes concerning the use of English (spoken)
      > > language were met with discouraging comments, basically
      > > that the language is not part of ISO 8601, and the standard
      > > is not for people but computer communication.
      > > . . .
      > > My opinion in that — whether it is part of ISO 8601 as a
      > > standard, or not — the frequency of use and the number of
      > > users will eventually make the verbal expression of date
      > > and time acceptable, comfortable-sounding to our ears.
      > > . . .
      >
      > Thank you very much for this message. I too was somewhat surprised at
      > some of the responses I got when I posted this question. It was almost
      > like the attitude was, "What a stupid question--why should anyone care
      > how they pronounce the date?" And most general answers to "how should
      > we say it" were "Anyway I feel like it", "Who cares", and "It doesn't
      > matter." It is interesting that people would be concerned enough about
      > a standard to join a discussion group but don't really care how it is
      > practically implemented in any form that could differ from their
      > current way of thinking.
      >
      > I've concluded the ISO 8601 people are divided into at least two
      > groups: (1) Those who believe it is a computer only format and/or it
      > is meant strictly for numbers in written form (as can be justified by
      > the standard itself), and (2) Those who believe the ISO 8601 sets
      > forth a logical standard which should be carried over into every
      > aspect of daily life to help facilitate easily comprehensible
      > communication. I happen to fall into the second group.
      >
      > Why should we communicate time as hh:mmm:ss [am/pm] essentially
      > worldwide and then have a free-for-all when it comes to date? The
      > logical date order as derived from time would be general (year) to
      > specific (day). Why should we use this format only with inter-computer
      > communication? Why should we only use this format when _writing_ the
      > date in _numeric_ form? U.S. English speakers generally read, write,
      > and speak the date in the same format (mm/dd/yyyy). Why should we
      > _only_ change the written numerical form of the date to the logical
      > international form but leave reading and speaking as is? (Just adds an
      > element of confusion.)
      >
      > Maybe I'll just have to join an Astronomy group to find out how they
      > speak the date as they write it (since they've been writing it this
      > way for years). :-) My two cents.
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >

      --
      -------------------------------------------------------------
      Tex Texin cell: +1 781 789 1898 mailto:Tex@...
      Xen Master http://www.i18nGuy.com

      XenCraft http://www.XenCraft.com
      Making e-Business Work Around the World
      -------------------------------------------------------------
    • valximus
      ... interchange ... I apologize. As a newbie, I came away with the wrong impression of the ISO 8601 (I didn t realize it was set forth _strictly_ for
      Message 2 of 24 , Dec 31, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Tex Texin <tex@x> wrote:
        > I think you came away with the wrong impression.
        >
        > A standard form of expression would be nice. However:
        >
        > 1) This is a forum for discussion of a date standard used for
        interchange
        > between computers.
        > You are proposing a different context that is out of scope.
        > It is not that it is unimportant, it is just off topic in this forum.
        > We pointed to other forums that want to talk about such matters.

        I apologize. As a newbie, I came away with the wrong impression of the
        ISO 8601 (I didn't realize it was set forth _strictly_ for computers).
        I'll take my random questions elsewhere. . . maybe start a petition
        for an ISO 8601-h for humans. :-)

        However, slightly on topic, while I realize various cultures express
        a.m./p.m. differently, are there any cultures that use ss:hh:mm or
        mm:ss:hh or ss:mm:hh as is the free-for-all with dates? That would be
        really funky. :-)
      • John Steele
        Actually, this group started an offshoot group, wwdates, specifically for such discussions, and Tex has been trying to get such discussions discussed there.
        Message 3 of 24 , Jan 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Actually, this group started an offshoot group, wwdates, specifically for such discussions, and Tex has been trying to get such discussions discussed there. Unfortunately, the group has never really gotten off the ground. You might want to cut and paste some basic points to a message there and try to get the discussion going.
           
          I don't agree 8601 is STRICTLY for computers; if it were, it would have used a day count (Julian or otherwise) or "stardate" or something and not quirky Gregorian dates and human (mixed mode) time metrics. However, it is for clear computer data interchange and reliable parsing while maintaining (some level of) human readability.

          valximus <iso8601@...> wrote:



          I apologize. As a newbie, I came away with the wrong impression of the
          ISO 8601 (I didn't realize it was set forth _strictly_ for computers).
          I'll take my random questions elsewhere. . . maybe start a petition
          for an ISO 8601-h for humans. :-)

        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.