I know nothing about the nuts and bolts of maintaining wikis, but travel sites routinely permit the reader to convert currencies through pop-up windows or other means. I would very much enjoy reading a CZ post on, say, Servius Tullius, where all dates were AUC but where I could easily (by a pop-up window for example) convert them into BCE. In principle, such an implementation could allow more or less seamless conversions among different dating systems, and the explanation for all this could form the basis for its own CZ article. This would require clarification concerning not only, for example, whether the Year of the Hegira could have a negative value, but whether the Jewish calendar should equally be used for articles on Israeli (or pre-1933 East European) history, the Buddhist calendar for Thai and Khmer history, a different Buddhist calendar for Tibetan history, the Jacobin calendar for the history of the French Revolution,... and anyone reading this could easily supply up to a dozen other examples...
Robert Cutler On Nov 09, Phil Wardle wrote: > Agreed David and a very good point indeed. > > I also think that we need to use culturally pertinent dating, at least > in parenthesis. > > As for Roma, A.U.C. (ab urba condita or anno urbis conditae) I have > already mentioned in jest, but I'm tempted to actually use it, even if > the foundation date of 753 BCE was based on legend, it is still a valid > dating system and in addition gives the reader a sense of the age of the > city state at the point in time that any article on ancient Roman > history is dealing with. > > Cheers, > Phil. > > > David Goodman wrote: > >I think Bill has it right, & it similar to WP practice. For a more > >detailed discussion, see the extremely extensive archived discussions > >on this question on WP. > > > >What is not WP practice but should be ours, is the dates of events in > >times/places not using either of these systems should additional have > >appropriate year numbers. I conside it culturally insensitive to > >disscuss events in the history of Islam without providing A.H. years, > >at least in parenthesis. As for Roman history, to be unambiguously > >clear, all we need do is add A.U.C. > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Citizendium-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l
