Re: DOCBOOK: RFE: Date Format

[kmself at ix dot netcom dot com]

on Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:00:36AM +1030, David Lloyd (lloy0076@rebel.net.au) wrote:
> 
> Hi There!
> 
> > Wouldn't that be a role of date?
> 
> Role as in an attribute "role"? Possibly....
> 
> > There are several problems with calendars in general (sorry, prior life
> > as a data analyst dealing with time and dates).
> 
> <snip>
> 
> That is all very interesting but it doesn't solve the original problem.
> The original problem was that noone could work out what 1/4/2000 (for
> example) means...if you pass the problem to a localised stylesheet then
> you can help avoid the cultural differences.

Actually, it does address the problem if:

  - Calendar and era are defined.
  - Localizations are defined.
  - Rules for applying localizations to calendar and era to produce
    display formats are defined.

> > generalized.  Defaults could be "CE" and "Gregorian", and stylesheets
> > could translate formats into appropriate display formats.
> 
> Agreed, though I don't like this CE term :-)

There are apparently some folks out there who object to Anno Domini, for
what might be called religious reasons.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>    http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
  What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?      There is no K5 cabal
   http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/        http://www.kuro5hin.org

PGP signature