On Jun 2, 2006, at 21:45, Daniel J. Sinder wrote:
If 12am/00:00 is considered the start of the day, then the rule
holds -- switching 12am to 12pm makes the event later that same day,
at noon.
Yes, you are right, of course.
Should 12am be listed as 0:00 or as 24:00?
Should 12:21am be liste
Carsten Dominik wrote:
> Well, if this is the way things are normally interpreted,
> then this is clearly a bug. Thanks for explaining this to me.
> Strange system. Switching am to pm always makes the event happen later,
> except when the hour is 12.
If 12am/00:00 is considered the start of th
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 07:15 +0200, Carsten Dominik wrote:
> It seems to me that the logic would be a bit better to schedule these
> show uo as 0:00 and 0:21. If you wanted to put something at midnight
> at the end of the day you would then have to use 24:00 and 24:21.
>
> Opinions?
That's pro
Well, if this is the way things are normally interpreted,
then this is clearly a bug. Thanks for explaining this to me.
Strange system. Switching am to pm always makes the event happen
later, except when the hour is 12.
However, I will not make items jump days because of a time
specification
I've noticed that '12pm' when used as a time-of-day specification
puts an entry at 24:00 in the agenda. '12am' places the item at
noon in the agenda.
It is arguable whether 00:00 should be used instead of 24:00.
Personally, I prefer it the way it is, where midnight events are
placed at 24:00 beca
