Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But we lose functionality that can't possibily be used in 2003 because
> 03-01-01 doesn't identify 03 as a year.
This argument is specious. You could equally well use it to justify
removing our support for dd-mm-yy and mm-dd-yy, because those aren't
unique either.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
