-----Original Message----- From: Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: February 12, 2001 23:54 Subject: [USMA:10971] Re: Fwd: Re: UK news article with only FFU >Dear Andy and All, > >ISO 8601 is essentially about the order that you use to present information >about dates, that is, it suggests that you go from biggest to smallest: > >Year --> month --> day. It is consistent with hours-->minutes-->seconds. Also with $$-->cc! Duncan > >ISO 8601 is very flexibly on how you do this. These seem OK under ISO 8601. > >2001 Feb 13 >2001Feb13 >2001-02-13 >20010213 >2001.02.13 Strictly speaking, the standards use 2001-02-13 or 2001 02 13. They do include 20010213 when space is at a special premium (and for internal computer use, of course). Incidentally, the standards employ the solidus (/) as a delimiter in expressing a range of dates. Eg. the meeting will take place 2001 02 14/16 or 2001 02 26/03 02 etc. Duncan > >If you are in any doubt about the clarity of the date, to people unfamiliar >with the new date format, then I suggest the first or the second format. If >you are labelling draft documents or putting dates on your email then I >suggest you use one of the others. > >Cheers, > >Pat Naughtin CAMS >Geelong, Australia > >on 2001-02-08 13.58, Andy Johnson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> BUT >> if I were to send a letter to somebody in Jacksonville >> about 02-01-2001, I would be understood to mean Feb. >> 1, 2001. How do I start to use your suggested format, >> the ISO format, without causing ambiguity? >> Andy >> --- Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Here in Jacksonville, Florida, I see February 21, >>>> 2001, and I also see 2-21-2001, but I really never >>>> observe, locally, any other way of writing the >>> date. >>> >>> Dear Andy and All, >>> >>> In a widely ignored notice the Australian Government >>> expressed its support >>> for the yyyy-mm-dd format in 1998, that is the >>> Australian Government >>> formally supports ISO 8601. >
