On 2007 Apr 4 , at 11:17 AM, Paul Trusten wrote:
I have been dating my checks in ISO format (e.g., today is
2007-04-04) for several months now with no problem, so apparently,
it is acceptable to the banks.
I've been dating my checks and everything else in the year-month-day
format for several years and have had no problems with it. (One
exception: if it is on a form and the form specifically requires some
other format, I will follow the format required.)
Usually, unless pure numerical form is required, I will print the
name of the month (or its abbreviation) instead of the number; thus,
tomorrow is:
2007 April 5
or
2007 Apr. 5
I just prefer to state the month explicitly by name.
I don't know if anyone dislikes the way I do it but at least it is
absolutely clear. There's no way the above can be interpreted as
meaning any month but April.
(And surely they cannot interpret the numbers to mean the 2007th day
of April in year #5 ! :-)
The pure numerical form
2007-04-05
SHOULD be absolutely clear, too, but I'll bet there are some out
there who would mix up the year and the month regardless of what
format is used.
They would probably mix-up the year with the others, too, if the year
is written as "07" instead of "2007". As we should have learned with
the "Y2K" crisis, the year should be written out in full, not
truncated to just the last two digits ... ever! If we do it again and
have trouble when the calendar turns over to 2100, we'll only have
ourselves to blame.
Regards,
Bill Hooper
Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA
==========================
SImplification Begins With SI.
==========================
