Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But in chapter 2 of Calendrical Calculations, they say: > > [...] Unlike the Julian calendar, this proleptic calendar > _does_ have a year 0.
I think that's silly. It's a matter of _notation_, and only notation, whether one chooses to write years the historical way (...,2 BC, 1 BC, AD 1, AD 2,...) or the astronomical way (...,-1, 0, 1, 2,...). Peter -- Peter J. Acklam - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://home.online.no/~pjacklam
