"Ron Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Would it be useful if I added a 'datestyle' of 'ISO basic' which
> would produce the most terse formats ('19980115' for dates, 
> and 'P1Y1M' for intervals)?

I don't really care for using that name for it --- for one thing, you
couldn't do
        set datestyle to iso basic;
because of syntax limitations.  A one-word name is a much better idea.

Perhaps call it "compact" or "terse" datestyle?

> PS: What's the best inexpenive way for me to know if this changed 
> at all between the final draft and the published standard? 

ANSI sells PDFs of ISO specs at their online store
although it looks like they want $81 for 8601, which is not my idea of

Usually ISO final drafts differ very little from the published specs;
I think you could just work from the draft and no one would complain.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to