Tue, 21 Jun 2016 19:03:19 +0200 "Peter N. M. Hansteen" <[email protected]>
> > I think Nick is right, the paper economics would mess week order,
> >
> > Jan 31, 2016 does not belong in the first week, it is in week
> > number [6].
>
> according to at the conventions the printed calendars here (Norway,
> but I suspect the rest of Europe is the same), January 1 and 2 do not
> belong in week 1 either. Rather, the convention is that at year end,
> if a week is split between two years, that week gets the number
> belonging to the year that has the most days of that week.
>
> Our cal does not follow that convention, that is, while it displays
> December of 2015 correctly,
>
> [Tue Jun 21 18:56:52] peter@elke:~$ cal -w dec 2015
> December 2015
> Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
> 1 2 3 4 5 [49]
> 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [50]
> 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [51]
> 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 [52]
> 27 28 29 30 31 [53]
>
> January 2016 comes out wrong (at least according to the convention here)
> :
>
> Tue Jun 21 18:56:59] peter@elke:~$ cal -w jan 2016
> January 2016
> Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
> 1 2 [ 1]
> 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [ 2]
> 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [ 3]
> 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [ 4]
> 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 [ 5]
> 31 [ 6]
>
>
> ncal on a FreeBSD system I have within reach does what I had expected:
>
> [Tue Jun 21 18:55:02] peter@rosalita:~$ ncal -w jan 2016
> January 2016
> Mo 4 11 18 25
> Tu 5 12 19 26
> We 6 13 20 27
> Th 7 14 21 28
> Fr 1 8 15 22 29
> Sa 2 9 16 23 30
> Su 3 10 17 24 31
> 53 1 2 3 4
>
> (ncal on Linux does much of the same, but of course the command line
> syntax differs slightly)
>
> I was blissfully unaware of cal -w until you wrote this, and I don't
> really care for the diff that started this thread, but having correct
> week numbering is to my mind a lot more useful. Then again, there may
> be week numbering conventions I'm not aware of (and of course there's
> the Monday vs Sunday as week start day issue).
Well, I'm then very glad the topic appeared, as this is interesting..
I use $ cal -mw because in Germany, where I have worked the weeks are
important for planning. In Bulgaria, where I live and EuroBSD 14 was
held, the week starts on Monday, and this is what I get for Jan 2016:
$ cal -mw jan 2016
January 2016
Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
1 2 3 [53]
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [ 1]
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [ 2]
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 [ 3]
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 [ 4]
Compared to this for the week start Sunday displayed without -m flag:
$ cal -w jan 2016
January 2016
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 [ 1]
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [ 2]
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [ 3]
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [ 4]
24 25 26 27 28 29 30 [ 5]
31 [ 6]
It is very important (for me) to be sure this is correct in our cal(1).
The thing is I too don't know what right is, and can't say more than I
prefer the base cal(1) to be kept less feature full for printing paper.
I have no say, just a user that used a lot of other UNIX before now is.
