> May be it's an idea to use ISO date in the documentation written in > English ? [snip] > YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM
...which subsequently confuses people who use DD-MM instead of MM-DD. Personally, after having lived in Europe for several years, and becoming used to date conventions used here, I'd read a date written; 2009-11-08 as 11 August 2009, not 08 November 2009 as it would be according to ISO8601. This problem is illustrated by: http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/iso-date (where it discusses both the problem of using numbers, and the issues of crossing languages and cultures). Also worth reading on this is: http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-date-format including the Pros and Cons of ISO8601. The Summary on this page comes to the same conclusion I've come to in the past: (quoting) "If there is likely to be any ambiguity on the part of the user, it is usually best to use explicit month names and 4-digit years for Gregorian dates, or at least indicate on the page how to read the dates." My thoughts on this... if we do switch to ISO8601 date formats, then we would need to be explicit about it - stating exactly what date format is being used. Anyone else have any thoughts on this? C. -- Clayton Cornell ccorn...@openoffice.org OpenOffice.org Documentation Project co-lead StarOffice - Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Hamburg, Germany --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@documentation.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@documentation.openoffice.org
