|
Hey! Sounds like a holy war coming on! <g> Certainly, most Americans would be very unfamiliar with dd/mm/yy, but using your logic, mm/dd/yy is even more screwy. I don't like to have to visually work through dd/mm/yy, although reading "15 March 2000" is, IMO, elegant. Not much use for data storage & date processing, though. If there were to be a world standard (hah!), I would vote for yyyy/mm/dd. Dan Bale IT - AS/400 Handleman Company 248-362-4400 Ext. 4952 -------------------------- Original Message -------------------------- I for one never understood the dd/mm/yy format. Why go from the least specific piece of information to the most specific? Just my $.02. +--- | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
