On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Peter J. Acklam wrote: > > Uh, speak for yourself, Mr. Christian. > > Err...I used "BC" only because Eugene van der Pijll used it in his > example.
I was just pointing out that we'd have to accept more than _just_ BC and AD, that's all. > > I suppose we could accept both, of course, but I'm really not > > convinced that its terribly useful, especially since a good > > chunk of the time the input to the year function will be a > > variable, not a string typed in by the programmer. > > But so much else in this module is ISO 8601 compliant, like the > default output formats, week dates, etc. Letting the year be an > exception is inconsistent. I've actually not read ISO 8601 except for a few snippets here and there. I'll try to read the whole thing soon. -dave /*======================= House Absolute Consulting www.houseabsolute.com =======================*/
