Wladimir [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-04-05 📝 Original message:On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-04-05
📝 Original message:On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Matt Whitlock <bip at mattwhitlock.name>wrote:
> On Saturday, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Timón wrote:
> > I like both DD-MM-YYYY and YYYY-MM-DD. I just dislike MM-DD-YYYY and
> YYYY-DD-MM.
>
> Your preferences reflect a cultural bias. The only entirely numeric date
> format that is unambiguous across all cultures is YYYY-MM-DD. (No culture
> uses YYYY-DD-MM, or at least the ISO seems to think so.)
>
Let's not waste any time shed-painting this. I'd like to finish this
discussion at once:
https://xkcd.com/1179/
Wladimir
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140405/f40e3dcb/attachment.html>
📝 Original message:On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Matt Whitlock <bip at mattwhitlock.name>wrote:
> On Saturday, 5 April 2014, at 12:21 pm, Jorge Timón wrote:
> > I like both DD-MM-YYYY and YYYY-MM-DD. I just dislike MM-DD-YYYY and
> YYYY-DD-MM.
>
> Your preferences reflect a cultural bias. The only entirely numeric date
> format that is unambiguous across all cultures is YYYY-MM-DD. (No culture
> uses YYYY-DD-MM, or at least the ISO seems to think so.)
>
Let's not waste any time shed-painting this. I'd like to finish this
discussion at once:
https://xkcd.com/1179/
Wladimir
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140405/f40e3dcb/attachment.html>