[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: RFE: Date Format
The simple answer to this is to state months as strings, rather than numbers -- although that raises the issue of language, DocBook has mechanisms in place to deal with that. I actually woudn't mind seeing a content model that permits explicit markup of the day/month/year without requiring it. But my problems with it are in reading documents -- the ones I write I control the date format and can prohibit the ambiguous formats. (BTW, I'm an American, and I prefer day month year order. But I seem to be in a minority) Mark David Lloyd wrote: >Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2001 11:13:00 -0800 (PST) >To: Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc@cu-portland.edu> >Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: RFE: Date Format >From: David Lloyd <lloy0076@rebel.net.au> >Hmmm... > >>Since when are they not searchable? http://www.LinuxDoc.org/search.html >>has options for what to search, and one of those is the mailing list >>archives. >So I didn't see the searchable part? I could draw conclusions about how >this reflects on the LDP, but... > >>This is, at least in some small part, because the LDP mailing lists are >>full of "flamers". Some long-time veterans just try to avoid those >>"flame-easy" topics, for the sake of getting any work done. >Some people make a suggestion, a RFE even, to make it easier on >everyone. The point of the matter is that there is a problem with dates >and soemone has attempted (alas, I am thinking not succesffully) to take >it out of the LDP's hands and put it all on the style sheets. Which, >incidentally, happen to render SGML documents in a style suitable to >one's purpose, location and desire. > >>addition to DocBook, but I'm still listening. For the LDP, this issue >>could be solved by getting non-profit status, and asking authors to give >>the copyrights to the LDP. This would allow the LDP to make "editorial >>changes", like putting the dates into a sane format. >Rubbish. I wouldn't licence the LDP to have editorial charge of any of >my work in a blue fit; as far as I can see they can't even decide what >date format one should use despite the fact there's an ISO standard. I >could make some particularly nasty remarks about Americans and >Europoeans but I will resist doing so (1). >This doesn't imply I wound not contribute. I would, however, submit work >to it on its current understanding: if anyone wants to make a change, >editorial or not they'll try their best to contact me. >DL >(1) >As far as I can see the Americans want the month first. Period. End of >story. And they're sticking to their guns... >-- >You have a deformed comb, >so go suck eggs... Mark Wroth <mark@astrid.upland.ca.us>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC