XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.books   
   From: hayesstw@telkomsa.net   
      
   On Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:36:32 +1200, YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:   
      
   >In article ,   
   >hayesstw@yahoo.com wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Fri, 23 Aug 2013 10:57:01 +0800, Robert Bannister    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >On 23/08/13 3:51 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:   
   >> >> On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:23:17 -0500, Doc O'Leary   
   >> >>  wrote:   
   >> >>   
   >> >>> In article ,   
   >> >>> Greg Goss  wrote:   
   >> >>>   
   >> >>>> Doc O'Leary  wrote:   
   >> >>>>   
   >> >>>>> As an aside, I always thought that a good way to get the US public   
   into   
   >> >>>>> using the metric system would be to market the hell out of metric   
   being   
   >> >>>>> a way to get *more*.  500 grams is *more* than a pound.  4 liters is   
   >> >>>>> *more* than a gallon.  100kph is *more* than 60mph.  Gluttony always   
   >> >>>>> wins in America.   
   >> >>>>   
   >> >>>> Don't you already use 2 litre pop bottles.   
   >> >>>   
   >> >>> No, but just because I'm not a fan of carbonated beverages.  We also   
   >> >>> have 9mm guns and plenty of gram-based drug traffic.  But it's not the   
   >> >>> same thing as widespread metric adoption.  Nothing that would give a   
   >> >>> time traveller from 50 years ago much trouble.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Agreed - though the NATO standard dates (I assume the months are   
   >> >> translated in non-English speaking areas) are 31Jan2013 or 31Jan13 so   
   >> >> that no one need question whether 01/12/12 refers to January 12th,   
   >> >> 2012 or December 1st, 2012.   
   >> >>   
   >> >   
   >> >If only everyone would adopt that.   
   >>   
   >> Or better still, if only everyone would adopt the SI standard of yyyy-mm-dd   
   >> for numerical dates.   
   >>   
   >> It makes sorting dates in a database so much easier, because you don't have   
   to   
   >> do any fancy programming to achieve it.   
   >   
   >The best option is to drop the month numbers entirely and use four digit   
   years.   
   >   
   >"1 Mar, 2013" and "Mar 1, 2013" (if Americans insist on continuing to do   
   >things ass-first) are both easily understandable.   
      
   But they don't sort without very fancy programming.   
      
   Here they are, entered at random and sorted with my word processor:   
      
   1 Mar, 2013   
   1727   
   28 Apr 1948   
   6 Apr, 1652   
   Apr 28 1948   
   Apr 6, 1652   
   Jun 1825   
   Mar 1, 2013   
      
   1652-04-06   
   1727-00-00   
   1825-06-00   
   1948-04-28   
   2013-03-01   
      
      
   --   
   Steve Hayes   
   Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/LITMAIN.HTM   
        http://www.goodreads.com/hayesstw   
        http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)