W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > November 2002

Re: HTML has, probably, confusing date format

From: Cyril <cyril2@mail.ru>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 09:42:19 +0300
Message-ID: <3DE5BACB.530C@mail.ru>
To: www-html@w3.org
Cc: "Mikko Rantalainen" <mira@cc.jyu.fi>

Dear Sirs, dear Mikko,

[In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2002Nov/0156.html ,
Mikko wrote:] --------------------------------
> For example, ISO 8601 has been official date format in China since
> 1994 and IIRC there're pretty many people in China.
----------------------------------------------

      So what is the IIRC;
      could you explain?
Could you, please, explain what does IIRC mean or stand for?

[In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2002Nov/0156.html ,
Mikko wrote:] --------------------------------
> I'd be fine if ISO 8601 defined date format as DDMMYYYY but that's 
> because official format is DD.MM.YYYY where I live.
----------------------------------------------

By a strange twist of fate, where I live, similar but worse date format
also had been pushed through. (I evaluate it as worse because it had
year like YY.) And all the time during that format was being pushed I
preferred *.MMM.* OR *.MMMM.* date formats i. e. formats where a month
represented only by letters because among other reasons, a month
represented by a word unambiguously determines a string comprising the
month-word as a Gregorian calendar's date and, in addition, it clear
shows a structure of that date/string. E. g. Date/Time Formats of
RFC2616, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", (
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt ), section 3.3.

Regards,
Cyril, Esq.
Received on Thursday, 28 November 2002 01:50:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:53 GMT