On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 05:39:16AM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote: > On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 00:50:16 +0000, Ken Gilmour wrote: > > On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 00:57:42 +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote: > >> On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 the mental interface of > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] told: > >>> I will be out of the office starting 12/26/2003 and will not > >>> return until 01/04/2004. > >> > >> He must feel very lucky being off for 3 months (payed ?) > > > > I believe the Americans do it backwards... 1/04/2004 being > > January 4th rather than 1st of April :-). > > Who's doing it backwards depends, I guess, on your point of view.
Both "4th January 2004" and "January 4th 2004" are clear; "2004/01/04" is clear, and sorts well; "04/01/2004" is sadly ambiguous due to the prevalence of the US date format but at least has the benefit of being in a rational order (i.e. not middle-endian). "01/04/2004" just has nothing to recommend it at all. I guess it's a religious war, but for once the superior options seem technically obvious. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
