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

Re: Pure ISO 8601 or varied for popular formats

Expand Messages
  • ali0917
    The human-readable numeric formats should be: 2000-06-14T23:59:59Z or 2000-06-14T19:59:59-04:00 2000-06-14 23:59:59 (UTC) or 2000-06-14 19:59:59 (UTC-04:00)
    Message 1 of 9 , Sep 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      The human-readable numeric formats should be:

      2000-06-14T23:59:59Z or 2000-06-14T19:59:59-04:00
      2000-06-14 23:59:59 (UTC) or 2000-06-14 19:59:59 (UTC-04:00)

      The latter should be default and the former should be for the
      internal code of programs.

      The example with "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13T18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
      isn't a very good example as the month is in two places and can
      confuse a reader.. Something like "2003-08-13 (Wed) 18:00:00
      (UTC+01:00)" would work much better. The "1999/12/31 (Friday)
      23:59:59" format has been in use in China & Japan for a LONG time
      so, it may be a good alternative. Modernising it to "1999-12-31
      (Fri) 23:59:59" may be the best bet. For worded longhand dates in
      English, something like "Saturday, 1 January 2000" (used in the UK)
      or "2000 January 1 (Saturday)" (used in the Chinese, Hangul &
      Japanese languages for thousands of years and by astronomers in the
      form of "1999 Dec 31.ddd..." (decimal part of day) for a few
      centuries) would work well.

      I hope any of this helped...

      --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Tex Texin <tex@i...> wrote:
      > Hi,
      >
      > My suggestion would be to have at least a "pure ISO 8601" mode
      that conforms
      > exactly and then offer the forms that you think are more natural
      or popular as
      > options or alternatives so you satisfy both worlds.
      > I don't think the ISO community will complain unless you
      misrepresent formats
      > that are close to 8601, but not defined in 8601, as 8601
      conformant. It might
      > help to warn your users that the 8601 format is best for data
      interchange and
      > the non 8601 variations are (perhaps) better for readability.
      >
      > That's my 2 cents. But check with your (potential) user community
      if possible.
      >
      > hth
      > tex
      >
      > hjwoudenberg@a... wrote:
      > >
      > > In a message dated 8/13/2003 5:25:01 PM Central Daylight Time,
      HJWOUDENBERG
      > > writes:
      > > Should be with blank before time
      > >
      > > > to = "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13 18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
      > >
      > > Subject: To Tex Texin
      > > Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:25:01 EDT
      > > From: HJWOUDENBERG@a...
      > >
      > > My date and time conversion for anywhere in the world to
      anywhere in the
      > > world is just about completed.
      > >
      > > I support the ISO to the letter, but would like you advice about
      some common
      > > practices
      > >
      > > The ISO to the letter requires the "T" as the designator for
      time:
      > >
      > > No zero suppression.
      > > No names of day or month
      > > Does do not permit truncation.
      > > Only permits reduced precision on time.
      > >
      > > It supports all combinations of date, time, fraction of
      time
      > > (hours,minutes,seconds[ fraction of days]),and Coordinate
      Universal Time
      > > offset and conversion for calendar dates, ordinal dates and week-
      dates.
      > > It does not support Time Intervals (As you have pointed
      out the
      > > problems).
      > >
      > > The general practices supports:
      > > 'That the "T" is replace with a blank.
      > > The name of the day and month can be prefixed to the date.
      > > The text abbreviation for the time zone may be suffixed
      after the
      > > offset.
      > >
      > > Tex, you know the ISO community. How much criticism can I
      expect? This
      > > general practices are the real world, how do you think they
      should be
      > > handled? Should I say these are not ISO dates? The market
      wants these
      > > features.
      > >
      > > Examples of the use of the function (.fr is ISO two letter code
      for France)
      > > to = ADT(.fr:2003-08-13T12:00:00-05:00)
      > > (;CEST is Central Eruopean Summer Time)
      > > to = ADT(;CET:2003-08-13T12:00:00-05:00)
      > >
      > > to= "2003-08-13T18:00:00+01:00"
      > >
      > > to = ADT(*I&=.fr|L|!TZA:2003-08-13T12:00:00-05:00)
      > >
      > > to = "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13T18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
      >
      > --
      > -------------------------------------------------------------
      > Tex Texin cell: +1 781 789 1898 mailto:Tex@X...
      > Xen Master http://www.i18nGuy.com
      >
      > XenCraft http://www.XenCraft.com
      > Making e-Business Work Around the World
      > -------------------------------------------------------------
    • hjwoudenberg@aol.com
      In a message dated 9/1/2003 9:30:07 PM Central Daylight Time, ... Is this an opinion or do you have proof, experimented with the others. This has not been my
      Message 2 of 9 , Sep 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 9/1/2003 9:30:07 PM Central Daylight Time, adam917@... writes:

        The example with "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13 18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
        isn't a very good example as the month is in two places and can
        confuse a reader..


        Is this an opinion or do you have proof, experimented with the others.  This has not been my experience.  Most people appreciate both in the heading of the reports, without the "T". My experience, they prefer both rather than either one of the other as you suggest. 

        Herman
      • Tex Texin
        Hi, I am not clear on what you are saying in the latter half of your mail. I agree that text names included with the date can be confusing. For some users they
        Message 3 of 9 , Sep 1, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi,

          I am not clear on what you are saying in the latter half of your mail.

          I agree that text names included with the date can be confusing.
          For some users they are reassuring however.

          When you say:

          > or "2000 January 1 (Saturday)" (used in the Chinese, Hangul &
          > Japanese languages for thousands of years

          I have to question this, since Gregorian calendar is relatively recent,
          adoption of English is even more recent, and lunar calendars were used going
          back millenia in China, but not so far back in Japan.

          Here is a page on Chinese calendar history:
          http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-chinese.html

          and for Japanese:
          http://www.ndl.go.jp/koyomi/e/history/02_index1.html

          Maybe you are referring to the date format, independent of the calendar in use?

          As for using English, it is acceptable in HK, and certainly is used in the
          other markets, but in general you will improve the marketability of your
          software if you use the native language.

          I would also recommend using the native characters for month, day and year as
          separators, as is the custom, where appropriate. For columns of dates or
          reports/screens where space is at a premium, using just the slash or hyphen
          separator characters is acceptable.

          However, this is cultural formating, not data interchange, and we are now far
          afield from 8601 which is the locus of this list.

          tex


          ali0917 wrote:
          >
          > The human-readable numeric formats should be:
          >
          > 2000-06-14T23:59:59Z or 2000-06-14T19:59:59-04:00
          > 2000-06-14 23:59:59 (UTC) or 2000-06-14 19:59:59 (UTC-04:00)
          >
          > The latter should be default and the former should be for the
          > internal code of programs.
          >
          > The example with "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13T18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
          > isn't a very good example as the month is in two places and can
          > confuse a reader.. Something like "2003-08-13 (Wed) 18:00:00
          > (UTC+01:00)" would work much better. The "1999/12/31 (Friday)
          > 23:59:59" format has been in use in China & Japan for a LONG time
          > so, it may be a good alternative. Modernising it to "1999-12-31
          > (Fri) 23:59:59" may be the best bet. For worded longhand dates in
          > English, something like "Saturday, 1 January 2000" (used in the UK)
          > or "2000 January 1 (Saturday)" (used in the Chinese, Hangul &
          > Japanese languages for thousands of years and by astronomers in the
          > form of "1999 Dec 31.ddd..." (decimal part of day) for a few
          > centuries) would work well.
          >
          > I hope any of this helped...
          >
          > --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Tex Texin <tex@i...> wrote:
          > > Hi,
          > >
          > > My suggestion would be to have at least a "pure ISO 8601" mode
          > that conforms
          > > exactly and then offer the forms that you think are more natural
          > or popular as
          > > options or alternatives so you satisfy both worlds.
          > > I don't think the ISO community will complain unless you
          > misrepresent formats
          > > that are close to 8601, but not defined in 8601, as 8601
          > conformant. It might
          > > help to warn your users that the 8601 format is best for data
          > interchange and
          > > the non 8601 variations are (perhaps) better for readability.
          > >
          > > That's my 2 cents. But check with your (potential) user community
          > if possible.
          > >
          > > hth
          > > tex
          > >
          > > hjwoudenberg@a... wrote:
          > > >
          > > > In a message dated 8/13/2003 5:25:01 PM Central Daylight Time,
          > HJWOUDENBERG
          > > > writes:
          > > > Should be with blank before time
          > > >
          > > > > to = "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13 18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
          > > >
          > > > Subject: To Tex Texin
          > > > Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:25:01 EDT
          > > > From: HJWOUDENBERG@a...
          > > >
          > > > My date and time conversion for anywhere in the world to
          > anywhere in the
          > > > world is just about completed.
          > > >
          > > > I support the ISO to the letter, but would like you advice about
          > some common
          > > > practices
          > > >
          > > > The ISO to the letter requires the "T" as the designator for
          > time:
          > > >
          > > > No zero suppression.
          > > > No names of day or month
          > > > Does do not permit truncation.
          > > > Only permits reduced precision on time.
          > > >
          > > > It supports all combinations of date, time, fraction of
          > time
          > > > (hours,minutes,seconds[ fraction of days]),and Coordinate
          > Universal Time
          > > > offset and conversion for calendar dates, ordinal dates and week-
          > dates.
          > > > It does not support Time Intervals (As you have pointed
          > out the
          > > > problems).
          > > >
          > > > The general practices supports:
          > > > 'That the "T" is replace with a blank.
          > > > The name of the day and month can be prefixed to the date.
          > > > The text abbreviation for the time zone may be suffixed
          > after the
          > > > offset.
          > > >
          > > > Tex, you know the ISO community. How much criticism can I
          > expect? This
          > > > general practices are the real world, how do you think they
          > should be
          > > > handled? Should I say these are not ISO dates? The market
          > wants these
          > > > features.
          > > >
          > > > Examples of the use of the function (.fr is ISO two letter code
          > for France)
          > > > to = ADT(.fr:2003-08-13T12:00:00-05:00)
          > > > (;CEST is Central Eruopean Summer Time)
          > > > to = ADT(;CET:2003-08-13T12:00:00-05:00)
          > > >
          > > > to= "2003-08-13T18:00:00+01:00"
          > > >
          > > > to = ADT(*I&=.fr|L|!TZA:2003-08-13T12:00:00-05:00)
          > > >
          > > > to = "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13T18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
          > >
          > > --
          > > -------------------------------------------------------------
          > > Tex Texin cell: +1 781 789 1898 mailto:Tex@X...
          > > Xen Master http://www.i18nGuy.com
          > >
          > > XenCraft http://www.XenCraft.com
          > > Making e-Business Work Around the World
          > > -------------------------------------------------------------
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

          --
          -------------------------------------------------------------
          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
          -------------------------------------------------------------
        • Adam NGUYEN
          I was referring to just the date format, not the actual calendar in use. The Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans have been using the year-month-day date order for a
          Message 4 of 9 , Sep 2, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
                     I was referring to just the date format, not the actual calendar in use. The Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans have been using the year-month-day date order for a VERY LONG time. Just ask Justin JIH ( his site is at http://www.geocities.com/jusjih ). He'll tell you the same thing.

                     What I really wonder is how did the US all of a sudden just start using month-day-year order in their dates ("Sunday, January 9, 2000" & "01/09/2000" are examples of written dates. "Sunday, January the ninth, two thousand" & "Sunday, January ninth, two thousand" are examples of the speech used in the US). The US' official language is English, which has always used day-month-year in a written date order in English-speaking countries before the US somehow, "came up with", the month-day-year order. Where did they get this idea from? Maybe they always have written their dates in month-day order and when they needed to put the year in, they just slapped it on as something extra?

                     What's accepted in HK? A year-month-day longhand date in English like "2000 January 1 (Saturday)"?

            At 2003-09-01 23:53 (UTC -0400), you wrote:

            Hi,

            I am not clear on what you are saying in the latter half of your mail.

            I agree that text names included with the date can be confusing.
            For some users they are reassuring however.

            When you say:

            > or "2000 January 1 (Saturday)" (used in the Chinese, Hangul &
            > Japanese languages for thousands of years

            I have to question this, since Gregorian calendar is relatively recent,
            adoption of English is even more recent, and lunar calendars were used going
            back millenia in China, but not so far back in Japan.

            Here is a page on Chinese calendar history:
            http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-chinese.html

            and for Japanese:
            http://www.ndl.go.jp/koyomi/e/history/02_index1.html

            Maybe you are referring to the date format, independent of the calendar in use?

            As for using English, it is acceptable in HK, and certainly is used in the
            other markets, but in general you will improve the marketability of your
            software if you use the native language.

            I would also recommend using the native characters for month, day and year as
            separators, as is the custom, where appropriate. For columns of dates or
            reports/screens where space is at a premium, using just the slash or hyphen
            separator characters is acceptable.

            However, this is cultural formating, not data interchange, and we are now far
            afield from 8601 which is the locus of this list.

            tex


            ali0917 wrote:
            >
            > The human-readable numeric formats should be:
            >
            > 2000-06-14T23:59:59Z or 2000-06-14T19:59:59-04:00
            > 2000-06-14 23:59:59 (UTC) or 2000-06-14 19:59:59 (UTC-04:00)
            >
            > The latter should be default and the former should be for the
            > internal code of programs.
            >
            > The example with "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13T18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
            > isn't a very good example as the month is in two places and can
            > confuse a reader.. Something like "2003-08-13 (Wed) 18:00:00
            > (UTC+01:00)" would work much better. The "1999/12/31 (Friday)
            > 23:59:59" format has been in use in China & Japan for a LONG time
            > so, it may be a good alternative. Modernising it to "1999-12-31
            > (Fri) 23:59:59" may be the best bet. For worded longhand dates in
            > English, something like "Saturday, 1 January 2000" (used in the UK)
            > or "2000 January 1 (Saturday)" (used in the Chinese, Hangul &
            > Japanese languages for thousands of years and by astronomers in the
            > form of "1999 Dec 31.ddd..." (decimal part of day) for a few
            > centuries) would work well.
            >
            > I hope any of this helped...
            >
            > --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Tex Texin <tex@i...> wrote:
            > > Hi,
            > >
            > > My suggestion would be to have at least a "pure ISO 8601" mode
            > that conforms
            > > exactly and then offer the forms that you think are more natural
            > or popular as
            > > options or alternatives so you satisfy both worlds.
            > > I don't think the ISO community will complain unless you
            > misrepresent formats
            > > that are close to 8601, but not defined in 8601, as 8601
            > conformant. It might
            > > help to warn your users that the 8601 format is best for data
            > interchange and
            > > the non 8601 variations are (perhaps) better for readability.
            > >
            > > That's my 2 cents. But check with your (potential) user community
            > if possible.
            > >
            > > hth
            > > tex
            > >
            > > hjwoudenberg@a... wrote:
            > > >
            > > > In a message dated 8/13/2003 5:25:01 PM Central Daylight Time,
            > HJWOUDENBERG
            > > > writes:
            > > > Should be with blank before time
            > > >
            > > > > to = "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13 18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
            > > >
            > > > Subject: To Tex Texin
            > > > Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:25:01 EDT
            > > > From: HJWOUDENBERG@a...
            > > >
            > > > My date and time conversion for anywhere in the world to
            > anywhere in the
            > > > world is just about completed.
            > > >
            > > > I support the ISO to the letter, but would like you advice about
            > some common
            > > > practices
            > > >
            > > > The ISO to the letter requires the "T" as the designator for
            > time:
            > > >
            > > >        No zero suppression.
            > > >        No names of day or month
            > > >        Does do not permit truncation.
            > > >        Only permits reduced precision on time.
            > > >
            > > >        It supports all combinations of date, time, fraction of
            > time
            > > > (hours,minutes,seconds[ fraction of days]),and Coordinate
            > Universal Time
            > > > offset and conversion for calendar dates, ordinal dates and week-
            > dates.
            > > >        It does not support Time Intervals (As you have pointed
            > out the
            > > > problems).
            > > >
            > > > The general practices supports:
            > > >        'That the "T" is replace with a blank.
            > > >        The name of the day and month can be prefixed to the date.
            > > >        The text abbreviation for the time zone may be suffixed
            > after the
            > > > offset.
            > > >
            > > > Tex, you know the ISO community.  How much criticism can I
            > expect?  This
            > > > general practices are the real world, how do you think they
            > should be
            > > > handled?  Should I say these are not ISO dates?  The market
            > wants these
            > > > features.
            > > >
            > > > Examples of the use of the function (.fr  is ISO two letter code
            > for France)
            > > >   to = ADT(.fr:2003-08-13T12:00:00-05:00)
            > > > (;CEST is Central Eruopean Summer Time)
            > > >   to = ADT(;CET:2003-08-13T12:00:00-05:00)
            > > >
            > > > to=  "2003-08-13T18:00:00+01:00"
            > > >
            > > > to = ADT(*I&=.fr|L|!TZA:2003-08-13T12:00:00-05:00)
            > > >
            > > > to = "Wednesday, August 2003-08-13T18:00:00+01:00 CEST"
            > >
            > > --
            > > -------------------------------------------------------------
            > > Tex Texin   cell: +1 781 789 1898   mailto:Tex@X...
            > > Xen Master                          http://www.i18nGuy.com
            > >
            > > XenCraft                          http://www.XenCraft.com
            > > Making e-Business Work Around the World
            > > -------------------------------------------------------------
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

            --
            -------------------------------------------------------------
            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
            -------------------------------------------------------------

            ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
            Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
            Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
            http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/1U_rlB/TM
            ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

             

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




            ---
            Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
            Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
            Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 2003-09-01
          • Adam NGUYEN
            Day-month-year dates have been common in a lot of the world because it means something like the first day, of the ninth month, of the two-thousand third year,
            Message 5 of 9 , Sep 3, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
                       Day-month-year dates have been common in a lot of the world because it means something like "the first day, of the ninth month, of the two-thousand third year, of the Common Era (or ...of the year 2003)". What's up with this "An American reply from Asia."? Did you mean a reply that preferred an Asian date format or an American with an Asian surname? You might as well say "A reply from a person born, raised, and still lives in the US in UK English, preferring Asian date formats" LOL. I always have used metric for measurement but, over here in the US, people that I've spoen to in the past don't seem to understand. They're very ignorant over metric, YYYY-MM-DD dates, and 24-hour times. They can't see the reason for it because they tend to have such a closed-minded attitude.

                       Here in the US, the day starts at midnight (00:00:00) but, is often labeled "12:00 AM" or "12 midnight" because of the AM/PM system still in wide use here. Few things I wonder about:

              1. Is AM/PM still used in writing a time in China, Taiwan, Korea, Japan, Vietnam, or the rest of Asia? I noticed that in my Region & Language setting in Windows XP, the "Vietnamese" default setting has a time with "SA" for AM and "CH" for PM. Are these wrong? I thought 24 hour was used in Vietnam.

              2. I thought that things would've changed very quickly after the Internet started being used as a regular information medium but, it looks like it hasn't, and now, there's more confusion than ever.

              At 2003-09-04 08:22 (UTC +0200), you wrote:

                      
              An American reply from Asia.
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: Adam NGUYEN
              To: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: 2003 09  03 Wednesday 02:17
              Subject: Re: [ISO8601] Re: Pure ISO 8601 or varied for popular formats

                      I was referring to just the date format, not the actual calendar in use. The Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans have been using the year-month-day date order for a VERY LONG time. Just ask Justin JIH ( his site is at http://www.geocities.com/jusjih ). He'll tell you the same thing.

                       What I really wonder is how did the US all of a sudden just start using month-day-year order in their dates ("Sunday, January 9, 2000" & "01/09/2000" are examples of written dates. "Sunday, January the ninth, two thousand" & "Sunday, January ninth, two thousand" are examples of the speech used in the US). The US' official language is English, which has always used day-month-year in a written date order in English-speaking countries before the US somehow, "came up with", the month-day-year order. Where did they get this idea from? Maybe they always have written their dates in month-day order and when they needed to put the year in, they just slapped it on as something extra?
                       What's accepted in HK? A year-month-day longhand date in English like "2000 January 1 (Saturday)"?
              ==========================================================
              I have an educated guess as to why we Americans got stuck with such an ass backward system.  The first clue is the English language, which used to express dates based on Christian religious traditions of yore, and - by the nature of western European languages - using possessive mode.  First
              of April, in the Year of the Lord Seventeen Hundred and Sixty-nine.
               
              In numbers,  1st of April, 1769 AD.  The revolutionary American governments wanted to break away from anything that was British, and switched the order around
              *.  July fourth, 1955.  The growing economic prowess and world leader ambitions would not allow the United States to give up its traditions, even when it meant falling behind Canada, Mexico and the rest of the world.  Hence the US is the only major industrialized nation that has made no effort to subscribe to the SI (Systeme Internationale),  the modernized metric system, although it has been a legal measurement system there for over a century.  The US also starts the week with the weekend, and the first hour of the day is 12, after midnight, instead of zero hour.  You go figure!
               
              Hong Kong is still plugging the British system, but slowly the ISO 8601 system and SI are seeping in.  The cars are still driven on the left side of the highways, the flats are still sold by area of square feet.  Hong Kong has about 45 years to join the standards set by the Mainland Chinese.  However, economic considerations will force Hong Kong and Macao to modernize much sooner than that.
              *
              A similar madness is what the Taiwan government is cooking up by developing a system for Romanization of Chinese characters, one that is different from the decades-old Pin-yin Chinese system.  Their reason for being different: to spite Beijing. It is a blatant politicizing of a scientific issue.  Never mind the difficulties of those who are trying to tackle the Mandarin language and now have to learn two different methods of reading Chinese characters printed in western letters.
              BUDAI  A. E.  —  Xinzhu City  Taiwan    email:
              bandi@...
            • ali0917
              Well, it s possible to write and say a date out in numeric form in year-month-day format, as it has been done with ISO s year-week-day format. Does this sound
              Message 6 of 9 , Sep 3, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Well, it's possible to write and say a date out in numeric form in
                year-month-day format, as it has been done with ISO's year-week-day
                format. Does this sound correct?: "Year 1999, Week 52, Day 6"

                How about this?: "(Year) 2000 (two thousand), Month 01 (one), Day 01
                (one)"?
                And this?: "(Year) 2000 (two thousand), Day 001 (one)"
                This?: "(Year) 2000, January 01 (one)"

                Are they all correct or should something be changed? Are dates in
                English commonly said in year-month-day format or day-month-year
                format? If they are said in year-month-day, what is said? If it's
                day-month-year, an example date in a sentence would be "Today is the
                third of September, two thousand [and] three.", right? Something
                else interesting to note is the Windows XP Regional settings
                have "Wednesday, 3 September, 2003" as the long date and "3/9/2003"
                (D/M/YYYY) as the short date, instead of YYYY-MM-DD as the short
                date and something like "2003 September 3 (Wednesday)".

                --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "Budai, Andrew" <bandi@m...> wrote:
                > An American reply from Asia.
                [...]
                > I have an educated guess as to why we Americans got stuck with
                such an ass backward system. The first clue is the English
                language, which used to express dates based on Christian religious
                traditions of yore, and - by the nature of western European
                languages - using possessive mode. First of April, in the Year of
                the Lord Seventeen Hundred and Sixty-nine.
                >
                > In numbers, 1st of April, 1769 AD. The revolutionary American
                governments wanted to break away from anything that was British, and
                switched the order around*. July fourth, 1955. The growing
                economic prowess and world leader ambitions would not allow the
                United States to give up its traditions, even when it meant falling
                behind Canada, Mexico and the rest of the world. Hence the US is
                the only major industrialized nation that has made no effort to
                subscribe to the SI (Systeme Internationale), the modernized metric
                system, although it has been a legal measurement system there for
                over a century. The US also starts the week with the weekend, and
                the first hour of the day is 12, after midnight, instead of zero
                hour. You go figure!
                >
                > Hong Kong is still plugging the British system, but slowly the
                ISO 8601 system and SI are seeping in. The cars are still driven on
                the left side of the highways, the flats are still sold by area of
                square feet. Hong Kong has about 45 years to join the standards set
                by the Mainland Chinese. However, economic considerations will
                force Hong Kong and Macao to modernize much sooner than that.
                >
                > -------------------------------------------------------------------
                -----------
                >
                > *A similar madness is what the Taiwan government is cooking up
                by developing a system for Romanization of Chinese characters, one
                that is different from the decades-old Pin-yin Chinese system.
                Their reason for being different: to spite Beijing. It is a blatant
                politicizing of a scientific issue. Never mind the difficulties of
                those who are trying to tackle the Mandarin language and now have to
                learn two different methods of reading Chinese characters printed in
                western letters.
                >
                > -------------------------------------------------------------------
                -----------
                >
                > BUDAI A. E. — Xinzhu City Taiwan email: bandi@m...
                > -------------------------------------------------------------------
                -----------
              • Budai, Andrew
                An American reply from Asia. ... From: Adam NGUYEN To: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com Sent: 2003 09 03 Wednesday 02:17 Subject: Re: [ISO8601] Re: Pure ISO 8601 or
                Message 7 of 9 , Sep 3, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  An American reply from Asia.
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  Sent: 2003 09  03 Wednesday 02:17
                  Subject: Re: [ISO8601] Re: Pure ISO 8601 or varied for popular formats

                           I was referring to just the date format, not the actual calendar in use. The Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans have been using the year-month-day date order for a VERY LONG time. Just ask Justin JIH ( his site is at http://www.geocities.com/jusjih ). He'll tell you the same thing.

                           What I really wonder is how did the US all of a sudden just start using month-day-year order in their dates ("Sunday, January 9, 2000" & "01/09/2000" are examples of written dates. "Sunday, January the ninth, two thousand" & "Sunday, January ninth, two thousand" are examples of the speech used in the US). The US' official language is English, which has always used day-month-year in a written date order in English-speaking countries before the US somehow, "came up with", the month-day-year order. Where did they get this idea from? Maybe they always have written their dates in month-day order and when they needed to put the year in, they just slapped it on as something extra?

                           What's accepted in HK? A year-month-day longhand date in English like "2000 January 1 (Saturday)"?
                  ==========================================================
                  I have an educated guess as to why we Americans got stuck with such an ass backward system.  The first clue is the English language, which used to express dates based on Christian religious traditions of yore, and - by the nature of western European languages - using possessive mode.  First of April, in the Year of the Lord Seventeen Hundred and Sixty-nine.
                   
                  In numbers,  1st of April, 1769 AD.  The revolutionary American governments wanted to break away from anything that was British, and switched the order around*.  July fourth, 1955.  The growing economic prowess and world leader ambitions would not allow the United States to give up its traditions, even when it meant falling behind Canada, Mexico and the rest of the world.  Hence the US is the only major industrialized nation that has made no effort to subscribe to the SI (Systeme Internationale),  the modernized metric system, although it has been a legal measurement system there for over a century.  The US also starts the week with the weekend, and the first hour of the day is 12, after midnight, instead of zero hour.  You go figure!
                   
                  Hong Kong is still plugging the British system, but slowly the ISO 8601 system and SI are seeping in.  The cars are still driven on the left side of the highways, the flats are still sold by area of square feet.  Hong Kong has about 45 years to join the standards set by the Mainland Chinese.  However, economic considerations will force Hong Kong and Macao to modernize much sooner than that.

                  *A similar madness is what the Taiwan government is cooking up by developing a system for Romanization of Chinese characters, one that is different from the decades-old Pin-yin Chinese system.  Their reason for being different: to spite Beijing. It is a blatant politicizing of a scientific issue.  Never mind the difficulties of those who are trying to tackle the Mandarin language and now have to learn two different methods of reading Chinese characters printed in western letters.

                  BUDAI  A. E.  —  Xinzhu City  Taiwan    email: bandi@...
                   

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