wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) (08/24/88)
In article <1785@water.waterloo.edu> ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu (Lee Dickey) writes: >In article <3900@enea.se> sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes: > ... [some good stuff deleted ] ... >> ... So in Sweden we write the >>date of today when we follow modern use as 88-08-21 or 880821. > >This pleases me. I would like to see things advance one step further, >so that a date like this yyyy-mm-dd becomes common usage. >I shudder to think of the confusion that will arise in about 13 years >if we do not adopt such a convention. Actually, (YY)YY-MM-DD, or rather (YY)YY MM DD, is the way school children in Germany and Austria are taught nowadays to write the date. I believe it is at least a DIN and OeNORM standard (German & Austrian), and may even be an ISO/SI standard. Seems that Europe is ahead of North America in that respect. As for four-digit years, even 13 years from now, most of the time it is going to be pretty clear from the context which century a date refers to. When it is not, common sense will dictate that people use four digits for the year. I don't think it will cause major confusion. The world weathered the last turn of the century, too, didn't it? -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: killer!dcs!wnp ESL: 62832882 DOMAIN: dcs!wnp@killer.dallas.tx.us TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD
jhf@lanl.gov (Joseph Fasel) (08/25/88)
In article <183@dcs.UUCP>, wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) writes: > In article <1785@water.waterloo.edu> ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu (Lee Dickey) writes: > >In article <3900@enea.se> sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes: > > ... [some good stuff deleted ] ... > >> ... So in Sweden we write the > >>date of today when we follow modern use as 88-08-21 or 880821. > > > >This pleases me. I would like to see things advance one step further, > >so that a date like this yyyy-mm-dd becomes common usage. > >I shudder to think of the confusion that will arise in about 13 years > >if we do not adopt such a convention. > > Actually, (YY)YY-MM-DD, or rather (YY)YY MM DD, is the way school children in > Germany and Austria are taught nowadays to write the date. I believe it is at > least a DIN and OeNORM standard (German & Austrian), and may even be an ISO/SI > standard. Seems that Europe is ahead of North America in that respect. It is in fact an ISO standard: ISO/R 2014-1971. Here is an excerpt: 3. RULES FOR WRITING CALENDAR DATES 3.1 Sequence An all-numeric date should be written in the following order: year-month-day 3.2 Characters An all-numeric date should be expressed exclusively in arabic numerals, i.e. by using only the decimal digits 0,1,2,...,9 and, if required, the hyphen (see clause 3.4). 3.3 Elements An all-numeric date should consist of - four digits to represent the year; NOTE. - Two digits may be used where no possible confusion can arise from the omission of the century: however, four digits should be applied especially in correspondence and for documentation purposes to indicate clearly that the descending order is used. - two digits to represent the month; - two digits to represent the day. 3.4 Separator Where a separator is used in an all-numeric date, only a hyphen or a space should be used between year and month, and between month and day. 3.5 Examples The 1st July 1971 should be written in one of the following ways: (a) 19710701 (b) 1971-07-01 (c) 1971 97 01
john@jetson.UPMA.MD.US (John Owens) (08/25/88)
In article <183@dcs.UUCP>, wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) writes: > I don't think [the turn of the century] will cause major confusion. > The world weathered the last turn of the century, too, didn't it? Yeah, but there weren't nearly as many computerized information systems then! I'm going to take all my money out of the bank on December 30, 1999 and not put it back until the panic settles. I really don't want to be charged -100 years interest. On the flip side, I wouldn't be surprised if lots of late bills due in late 1999 aren't flagged as late - they won't be due for another 99 years. I'm sure people are working on cleaning up their software, but there'll always be something not caught until there's a disaster. (Psychic Prediction: The first hint of the oncoming period of chaos and confusion will be when ATM cards issued in 1998 expiring in 2000 or later are not accepted by ATM machines, since 98 > 00.) -- John Owens john@jetson.UPMA.MD.US SMART HOUSE L.P. uunet!jetson!john (old uucp) +1 301 249 6000 john%jetson.uucp@uunet.uu.net (old internet)
hulsebos@philmds.UUCP (Rob Hulsebos) (08/26/88)
In article <183@dcs.UUCP>, wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) writes: > I don't think [the turn of the century] will cause major confusion. > The world weathered the last turn of the century, too, didn't it? I once saw a computer-system in which only the last two digits of the year of birth could be entered. This worked fine until somebody born near the end of the 19th century showed up. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ R.A. Hulsebos ...!mcvax!philmds!hulsebos Philips I&E Automation Modules phone: +31-40-785723 Building TQ-III-1, room 11 Eindhoven, The Netherlands # cc -O disclaimer.c
sjaak@wundt.psy.vu.nl (Sjaak Schuurman) (08/26/88)
In article <126@jetson.UPMA.MD.US> john@jetson.UPMA.MD.US (John Owens) writes: > >Yeah, but there weren't nearly as many computerized information >systems then! I'm going to take all my money out of the bank on >December 30, 1999 and not put it back until the panic settles. Gosh! A splendid idea, indeed. Let's _all_ do it, and see what will remain of the whole financial world at all. I think we don't have to worry when to return our money. BTW. I'll do it on December 29, 1999 for I have a date the next day :-! ~sjaak.
wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) (08/27/88)
In article <764@philmds.UUCP> hulsebos@philmds.UUCP (Rob Hulsebos) writes: >In article <183@dcs.UUCP>, wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) writes: >> I don't think [the turn of the century] will cause major confusion. >> The world weathered the last turn of the century, too, didn't it? > >I once saw a computer-system in which only the last two digits of the >year of birth could be entered. This worked fine until somebody >born near the end of the 19th century showed up. Enough already! I didn't suggest that there would be NO difficulties associated with (a) the turn of the century or (b) two-digit years. The posting I was responding to lamented the fact that it would be difficult to get EVERYBODY using international-style dates (YYYY MM DD), and that even in countries which use it, the abbreviated, two-digit year was very common. He suggested that THAT would cause major confusion 13 years from now. Programmers who totally forget that this is not the only century have ALWAYS run into problems (see the posting quoted above), it's got nothing to do with 13 years from now; Programmers ALWAYS have had to make allowances in their code for the fact that the general population does not think like a hacker -- even the average computer operator in, say, an insurance company or bank, doesn't think like a hacker. Again: the way people write or don't write their dates will NOT cause major confusion 13 years from now, no more than it's causing now. Sloppy programming, in this area as in many others, has the potential to ALWAYS cause major trouble. People's panic reactions (like taking your money out on Dec. 31, 1999) WILL INDEED cause major confusion and trouble -- computers or no computers, two-digit or four-digit years notwithstanding. At every turn of the century throughout history, it have been freak reactions which have caused confusion, not the inefficiencies or imperfections of everyday practices. -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: killer!dcs!wnp ESL: 62832882 DOMAIN: dcs!wnp@killer.dallas.tx.us TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD
flaps@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) (08/29/88)
In article <186@dcs.UUCP> wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) writes: >The posting I was responding to lamented the fact that it would be difficult >to get EVERYBODY using international-style dates (YYYY MM DD), and that even >in countries which use it, the abbreviated, two-digit year was very common. >He suggested that THAT would cause major confusion 13 years from now. > >Programmers who totally forget that this is not the only century have >ALWAYS run into problems (see the posting quoted above [birthdates in >the 19th century]), it's got nothing to do with 13 years from now; Ahem. Everyone seems to be missing this originally good point. What date is 030482? Well, if you're American it's 4 March 1982, else it's 3 April 1982. What date is 820403? 3 April 1982 no matter what. But what date is 030405? Well maybe it's 3 April 2005, maybe it's 4 March 2005, but it's possibly 5 April 2003 as well. This is the confusion. This doesn't apply to birthdates from the 19th century. If an adult's birthdate is 860201, you might first assume data entry error, then assume 1 February 1886. There's the century problem, but not the year vs day number problem. It's the low year numbers within the century that does it, obviously. ajr -- owotd (rot13): fabgentf