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

Fwd: RE: Feedback - ISO8601 - Suggestions to eGroups

Expand Messages
  • Justin JIH
    Tired of having to encounter mm/dd/yyyy in eGroups? I have just sent a suggestion to eGroups opposing continued use of all-numerical mm/dd/yyyy in versions of
    Message 1 of 3 , Nov 15, 2000
      Tired of having to encounter mm/dd/yyyy in eGroups? I have just sent a
      suggestion to eGroups opposing continued use of all-numerical mm/dd/yyyy in
      versions of the USA, Canada (English), and even China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan
      where Chinese is spoken (!). I have just received a reply. I hereby cite my
      suggestion and its reply. My suggestion is mostly the same as the letter in
      the group folder of files, plus my own words.

      Best wishes,
      Justin JIH
      A Chinese-American member opposing mm/dd/yyyy


      >From: eGroups Feedback <egroups-feedback@...>
      >Reply-To: eGroups Feedback <egroups-feedback@...>
      >To: Justin JIH <jusjih@...>
      >Subject: RE: Feedback - ISO8601 - Suggestions
      >Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:37:54 -0800
      >
      >Hello Justin,
      >
      >Thank you for taking the time to give us your feedback!
      >
      >Yahoo! eGroups sincerely appreciates your comments and suggestions.
      >While we cannot respond to them individually due to the large volume of
      >feedback we receive, please know that your feedback is forwarded to our
      >development team for review. Your opinions and insights are essential to
      >us as we continue to improve the Yahoo! eGroups service.
      >
      >If you have questions with using Yahoo! eGroups, please contact us by
      >using the online help form at:
      >
      >
      > http://add.yahoo.com/fast/help/us/egroups/cgi_feedback
      >
      >and we'll be happy to assist you.
      >
      >Thanks for using Yahoo! eGroups.
      >
      >Sincerely,
      >
      >The Yahoo! eGroups Team
      >Thank you for using Yahoo!, and please let us know if we can be of
      >further assistance.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >Original Message Follows:
      >------------------------
      >
      >
      >Group Name: ISO8601
      >
      >Subject: Suggestions
      >
      >Type your feedback here:
      > I use your service and notice that you
      >are using a potentially confusing date
      >notation in versions of not only the
      >USA, but also Canada (English), China,
      >Hong Kong, and Taiwan,
      >internationally.
      >
      >People from all over the world are able
      >to visit your site and there
      >are many date formats currently in use.
      >These visitors might not obtain
      >full value from the information you are
      >providing if they are not sure
      >of the date it represents.
      >
      >Did you know of the existence of an
      >international date format defined
      >by the International Standards
      >Organisation as ISO 8601 "Data
      >elements and interchange formats -
      >Information interchange -
      >Representation of dates and times".
      >This defines the date in such a way to
      >ensure there is no confusion as
      >to which date is represented.
      >
      >For example, what date is 27/04/93?
      >Most likely 27th April 1993.
      >What date is 11/02/98? It could be
      >11th February 1998 or 2nd November
      >1998.
      >When we move into the 21st century, it
      >could become even more confusing.
      >What about 09/12/18? It could be 9th
      >December 1918 or 2018, or 12th
      >September 1918 or 2018.
      >
      >What about 2011-07-12? Due to the four
      >number prefix this is instantly
      >recognisable as the ISO8601 format so
      >it MUST be the 12th of July 2011.
      >No other possibility therefore no
      >possible confusion.
      >
      >The basic format is CCYY-MM-DD where CC
      >is the century, YY is the year
      >in that century, MM is the month in
      >numeric format and DD is the day in
      >numeric format. Note that this has the
      >largest time unit on the left
      >and decreases in unit size as you move
      >to the right. If you see a four
      >number prefix then it must be the
      >century/year first and therefore an
      >ISO8601 representation of the date.
      >
      >To take this further, adding the time
      >in 24 hour format can give a
      >representation of a point in time as a
      >definition decreasing in unit
      >size as you move left to right. For
      >example, 1998-12-25 12:23:30.
      >
      >I do not understand exactly why impose
      >am/pm throughout the world even where
      >not used? That does not make good sense.
      >
      >For further examples and some more
      >convincing arguments to use this
      >format please see
      >http://www.saqqara.demon.co.uk/datefmt.h
      >tm and the ISO8601 community at
      >http://www.egroups.com/group/ISO8601
      >where many people from around the world
      >are trying to standardise on this date
      >format.
      >
      >Even if local practice is more
      >important, in month/day/year format
      >used in the USA & Canada, words of
      >months should be used, i.e., Sun, Nov
      >12, 2000 rather than Sun 11/12/2000.
      >
      >The month/day/year format is NOT used
      >in China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.
      >Chinese use yyyy-mm-dd, which is the
      >same as ISO 8601 :-), followed by the
      >day of the week, i.e., 2000-11-12 (day
      >of the week) rather than the day of the
      >week followed by 11/12/2000.
      >
      >As eGroups in the United Kingdom,
      >Australia, India, Singapore, France,
      >Canada (French), Spain, Mexico use
      >local words in months without ambiguity
      >in dates, eGroups users in the USA,
      >Canada (English), China, Hong Kong, and
      >Taiwan should no longer be exposed to
      >all numerical mm/dd/yyyy, which is
      >potentially confusing. Being exposed to
      >all numerical mm/dd/yyyy, especially in
      >Chinese area, is not fair.
      >
      >If you have any questions about the
      >International Date Format, please
      >email me at jusjih@....
      >
      >Thank you for taking the time to read
      >this.
      >
      >Regards
      >Justin JIH
      >A Chinese-American eGroups user
      >
      >
      >While Viewing: http://www.egroups.com/info/contact.html
      >
      >Yahoo ID: unknown
      >Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows NT 5.0)
      >REMOTE_ADDR: 24.168.44.81
      >REMOTE_HOST: unknown
      >Date Originated: Tuesday November 14, 2000 - 21:24:36
      >-------
      >

      _________________________________________________________________________
      Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

      Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
      http://profiles.msn.com
    • Archie Medrano
      $ What about 2011-07-12? Due to the four $ number prefix this is instantly $ recognisable as the ISO8601 format so $ it MUST be the 12th of July 2011. $
      Message 2 of 3 , Nov 16, 2000
        $ >What about 2011-07-12? Due to the four
        $ >number prefix this is instantly
        $ >recognisable as the ISO8601 format so
        $ >it MUST be the 12th of July 2011.
        $ >No other possibility therefore no
        $ >possible confusion.
        $ >
        $ >The basic format is CCYY-MM-DD where CC
        $ >is the century, YY is the year
        $ >in that century, MM is the month in
        $ >numeric format and DD is the day in
        $ >numeric format. Note that this has the
        $ >largest time unit on the left
        $ >and decreases in unit size as you move
        $ >to the right. If you see a four
        $ >number prefix then it must be the
        $ >century/year first and therefore an
        $ >ISO8601 representation of the date.

        Why do people still use "century" for the first two Y's
        in "YYYY-MM-DD"? For example, 1960 is in the 20th century,
        not the 19th. The only "20**" year in the 20th century
        is the year "2000", which is also in the SECOND MILLENNIUM,
        not the THIRD.


        --
        Archie Medrano amedrano@... http://euclid.ucsd.edu/~amedrano/
        "I made mistakes when I played with your mind..." -- Lawrence/Abdul
      • Justin JIH
        ... The term century is used in ISO 8601 5.2.1.1. I recognise there may be still a few flaws therein, like the term century . Other flaws include but are
        Message 3 of 3 , Nov 16, 2000
          --- In ISO8601@egroups.com, Archie Medrano <amedrano@e...> wrote:
          > $ >The basic format is CCYY-MM-DD where CC
          > $ >is the century, YY is the year
          > $ >in that century, MM is the month in
          > $ >numeric format and DD is the day in
          > $ >numeric format.
          ......
          > Why do people still use "century" for the first two Y's
          > in "YYYY-MM-DD"? For example, 1960 is in the 20th century,
          > not the 19th. The only "20**" year in the 20th century
          > is the year "2000", which is also in the SECOND MILLENNIUM,
          > not the THIRD.

          The term "century" is used in ISO 8601 5.2.1.1. I recognise there may
          be still a few flaws therein, like the term "century". Other flaws
          include but are not necessarily limited to:

          (1) Use of a letter "T" between a date and a time looks odd, though
          ISO 8601 does allow its omission under a note of 5.4.1)
          (2) Use of a solidus (/) to indicate a period of time may tend to
          mislead, though a double hyphen is allowed under a note of 5.5.2.
          Outside ISO 8601, a "~" may be seen in some cases. I prefer "~".

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