On Monday, July 18, 2011 05:56:14 peter dalgaard wrote: > but even this is dubious, since there is no year 0 AD. In Gregorian and > Julian calendars, 1 BC continues directly into 1 AD. >
Although this seems to be a widely recognized "problem," I would argue it is an entirely specious one. It makes no more sense to recognize a "year 0" than it would worry about the lack of a "zeroth" inch or We name centuries and decades without issues. in smaller time intervals with no problem. The entire concern comes down to naming issue. Whenever a fraction from the first inch on a ruler is named, it is written as 0.* or */** - with either a preceding 0, or as a common fraction written without any preceding whole number. Every year in the 19th century starts with "18" yet few people are confused. Why has this ever been regarded as an issue? JWDougherty ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
