July 17, 2017 at 3:22 pm
Sinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:54 PMrobert.sterbal 56890 - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:47 PMSteve Jones - SSC Editor - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:44 PMJeff Moden - Monday, July 17, 2017 9:17 AMI'd just like to see people start using their heads when naming directories and how they structure directories. For example, having monthly directories stored as MMMYYYY is insane. It defies sorting, which is especially important when trying to find directories that can be dropped due to age. You might thing the created date would be enough until you realize that someone creates a whole year of directories at a time.Yep, I always try to set things as yyyymmdd as a default when I can.
do you prefer yyyymmdd or yyyy-mm-dd?
I use DDMMMYY, so today would be 17JUL17. Zero international confusion, maximum compactness.
... and totally NOT sortable when it comes to directory or file names.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 17, 2017 at 3:23 pm
Sinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 1:51 PMrobert.sterbal 56890 - Monday, July 17, 2017 1:45 PMSinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:54 PMI use DDMMMYY, so today would be 17JUL17. Zero international confusion, maximum compactness.It doesn't sort very well
True that. If dates were standardized like numbers, 20170717 would be a naturally sortable date, and int to boot!
So why do you insist on using the DDMMMYY format?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 17, 2017 at 3:24 pm
Sinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:54 PMrobert.sterbal 56890 - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:47 PMSteve Jones - SSC Editor - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:44 PMJeff Moden - Monday, July 17, 2017 9:17 AMI'd just like to see people start using their heads when naming directories and how they structure directories. For example, having monthly directories stored as MMMYYYY is insane. It defies sorting, which is especially important when trying to find directories that can be dropped due to age. You might thing the created date would be enough until you realize that someone creates a whole year of directories at a time.Yep, I always try to set things as yyyymmdd as a default when I can.
do you prefer yyyymmdd or yyyy-mm-dd?
I use DDMMMYY, so today would be 17JUL17. Zero international confusion, maximum compactness.
Doesn't sort well as compared to yyyymmdd.
July 18, 2017 at 8:13 am
Sinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 1:51 PMrobert.sterbal 56890 - Monday, July 17, 2017 1:45 PMSinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:54 PMI use DDMMMYY, so today would be 17JUL17. Zero international confusion, maximum compactness.It doesn't sort very well
True that. If dates were standardized like numbers, 20170717 would be a naturally sortable date, and int to boot!
Is JUL internationally recognized as July?
YYYY-MM-DD and YYYYMMDD conform to ISO 8601 standard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
July 18, 2017 at 8:24 am
Eric M Russell - Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:13 AMSinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 1:51 PMrobert.sterbal 56890 - Monday, July 17, 2017 1:45 PMSinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:54 PMI use DDMMMYY, so today would be 17JUL17. Zero international confusion, maximum compactness.It doesn't sort very well
True that. If dates were standardized like numbers, 20170717 would be a naturally sortable date, and int to boot!
Is JUL internationally recognized as July?
YYYY-MM-DD and YYYYMMDD conform to ISO 8601 standard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601
It's probably not, based on searches I've made. But, for lack of standard, the Germanic/Latin remnants of the British, French, and Spanish empires around the globe should make JUL more familiar to 3/4 of the world than any other abbreviation.
July 18, 2017 at 8:40 am
Sinisa Jazic - Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:24 AMIt's probably not, based on searches I've made. But, for lack of standard, the Germanic/Latin remnants of the British, French, and Spanish empires around the globe should make JUL more familiar to 3/4 of the world than any other abbreviation.
But not more familiar that numerical month which is universal across all languages where the Gregorian calendar is use.
[It's kind of interesting that Arabic numbering, 12/24 hour time and clock dials are close to 100% universal. ]
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
July 18, 2017 at 8:46 am
Sinisa Jazic - Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:24 AMEric M Russell - Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:13 AMSinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 1:51 PMrobert.sterbal 56890 - Monday, July 17, 2017 1:45 PMSinisa Jazic - Monday, July 17, 2017 12:54 PMI use DDMMMYY, so today would be 17JUL17. Zero international confusion, maximum compactness.It doesn't sort very well
True that. If dates were standardized like numbers, 20170717 would be a naturally sortable date, and int to boot!
Is JUL internationally recognized as July?
YYYY-MM-DD and YYYYMMDD conform to ISO 8601 standard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601It's probably not, based on searches I've made. But, for lack of standard, the Germanic/Latin remnants of the British, French, and Spanish empires around the globe should make JUL more familiar to 3/4 of the world than any other abbreviation.
Phonetically they're similar but are still slightly different in both pronunciation and spelling in all those languages and would be even more confusing going to languages that don't use a latin typed alphabet. Where as the 7th month of the year is the 7th month of the year regardless of what it's called.
July 18, 2017 at 8:48 am
jay-h - Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:40 AMSinisa Jazic - Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:24 AMIt's probably not, based on searches I've made. But, for lack of standard, the Germanic/Latin remnants of the British, French, and Spanish empires around the globe should make JUL more familiar to 3/4 of the world than any other abbreviation.But not more familiar that numerical month which is universal across all languages where the Gregorian calendar is use.
[It's kind of interesting that Arabic numbering, 12/24 hour time and clock dials are close to 100% universal. ]
True that. Still, it would be nice to make time metric: 365 days a year, 1000 millidays/day, and it gets uglier... but that's the beauty of metric.
Then again, what's pretty about 60 seconds, 60 minutes, 24/12 hrs, 7 days, 28/29/30/31 day months, 12 months, and leap years, leap days, leap hours, leap minutes, leap seconds, etc?
Ergo, metric wins.
July 18, 2017 at 9:19 am
Sinisa Jazic - Tuesday, July 18, 2017 8:48 AMTrue that. Still, it would be nice to make time metric: 365 days a year, 1000 millidays/day, and it gets uglier... but that's the beauty of metric.Then again, what's pretty about 60 seconds, 60 minutes, 24/12 hrs, 7 days, 28/29/30/31 day months, 12 months, and leap years, leap days, leap hours, leap minutes, leap seconds, etc?
Ergo, metric wins.
They tried decimalization in France over 100 years ago. Failed. The developer of the Swatch tried to create 'internet time' which was global and 10 based. Failed.
Win for the Babylonians.
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
Viewing 9 posts - 46 through 53 (of 53 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply