There is no danger of ambiguity provided the year is stated in full. if people start abbreviating like this, 01-JAN-01, then we are still no better off. There are many computer systems that have printed dates in this format. 01-JAN-99 or 99-JAN-01 is usually not seen as ambiguous but until 2032 such a format is ambigous. Hence YYYY should always stated. Baron Carter -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 14 February, 2001 13:19 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:11007] Re: Fw: Well, damn it, NASA ought to be metr [Yahoo! Clubs: Metric America] Kilopascal wrote in USMA 11005: >> Changing the numeric month to letters is wrong. Leave the standard as it >is. Also, there is only one hyphen between the digits, not two. >> >> Today is 2001-02-14. Any problems understanding this? Two days ago there was a problem about interpreting 01-02-12. Was it Jan 2, 1912 Feb 1, 1912 Feb 12, 2001 ? CAN/CSA-Z234,4-89, based on ISO 8601, on All-Numeric Dates and Times states: Note:When the month is spelled out, any sequence is permissible because no danger of ambiguity exists. For example, neither 1 July nbor July 1 can be misinterpreted." Kilopascal favors purity even if it might be misunderstood. What does he think is the purpose of all-numeric dating? Joseph B. Reid 17 Glebe Road West Toronto M5P 1C8 Tel. 416 486-6071
