> Rick Measham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I figure that DateTime itself shouldn't be described as a > 'Gregorian' module, but as a 'Gregorian AD (or CE)' module. > This means there's a year 0 and -1 etc back to -INF.
�Que? Why would "Gregorian AD module" imply that there is a year 0, -1, etc.? I'd say quite the opposite. "Gregorian AD module" sounds like a module which can only handle AD years. > There'd be a DateTime::Calendar::BCAD module which takes > years in the form /\d+\s*(B?CE?|AD)/. (OK, that's not > quite right but you get the idea) > > When converting one-to-the-other, then we get the > angst. Should 0 in DateTime be 1BC in ::BCAD or should it > be an error or should it be 0AD? There certainly is no "AD 0" neither in the historical AD/BC notation or the astronomical notation. Peter -- Peter J. Acklam - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://home.online.no/~pjacklam
