Ian Davey wrote: > Garth Wallace wrote: > >> Glenn Miller wrote: >> >>> On 22 Mar 2002, Jay Garcia was seen to have posted this wee note into >>> netscape.public.mozilla.general, to which I have responded as follows: >>> >>> >>>> The build date is 03-14-2002 but that doesn't mean that it's using the >>>> 0.9.9 Gecko engine. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I didn't know that there was a 14th month! >>> >>> Why not use the standard date of day/month/year - instead of some >>> cockeyed arrangement with the day after the month but before the year. >> >> >> >> "Standard date of day/month/year"? Huh? >> >> Are you British? >> > > Least significant to most significant, or most significant to least > significant does seem to be pretty much a standard. I've never really > understood the logic behind the US format. > > It's not as you do "mm:ss:hh" or "mm:hh:ss" for time. Just one of those > quirks of history I guess. > > ian. >
I don't know why we do it MM/DD/YYYY, but I'm guessing it has something to do with spoken English overflowing into and influencing written English. When spoken aloud, "March 22nd, 2002" is less formal and more common than "22nd of March, 2002." At least, that's how it works in my corner of the USA. I see your point and like the idea of least to greatest, but many people have been "trained" too well. Whenever I see something like 070101 I immediately think "July 1st, 2001." -- ~/Garth
