[MlMt] Modifying Reply Date Format

[Charlie Garrison]

On 11 Jun 2020, at 10:09, Pete Resnick wrote:

> Charlie: First, do note that this is for the intro line in the 
> message, not the Date: header field, which would be used for the 
> important stuff. The Date: field is formatted unambiguously as part of 
> the protocol. For the intro bit, it's already ambiguous in that it 
> doesn't include the time zone, so no need to get too fussy about that 
> part.

As someone who grew up using US dates, and then switched 30 years ago, I 
know both sides. And it's the human reading the intro line I was 
referring to; humans are easily confused by nature. I know to accept 
both formats, and I can still get it wrong.

> Also, totally numeric is OK if you follow RFC 3339, which has a nice 
> format of yyyy-mm-dd. Even though you could switch month and day, even 
> us stupid Americans don't usually do that when the year comes first; 
> it's so unusual to have the year first, that we generally figure out 
> that the month comes next. ;-)

Sure, the iso8601 standard is fine. But I made an assumption :-O that 
"uncouth Americans" would not use that format. If using iso8601, then 
all numbers is just fine and dandy.

-cng

-- 

     Charlie Garrison                   <charlie at garrison.com.au>
     Garrison Computer Services      <http://www.garrison.com.au>
     PO Box 380
     Tumbarumba NSW 2653  Australia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freron.com/pipermail/mailmate/attachments/20200611/10bb4d8a/attachment.htm>