On 06/03/2010 10:28 AM, Daniel Barclay wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 06/01/2010 10:06 AM, Daniel Barclay wrote:
Andrei Popescu wrote:
...
You example shows only dates where it is quite obvious what date
format is used. Let me see...
-rwx------ 1 amp amp 891837 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010065.jpg
-rwx------ 1 amp amp 733361 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010066.jpg
Can you tell if these files were created 5th march or 3rd may? How
(I'd really like to know)?
The third of May, because it's recognizable as the ISO date/time
format (because of the hyphens, and, in that case, because of the
time format (no "am" or "pm") and position (after the date part)).
Yes, that depends on there not being any similar format that uses
hyphens but a different number order, but there isn't, is there?
And even if one doesn't already know the ISO format, one could easily
recognize from the year, hour, and minute that the components are
in descending size order (year before month, month before day of
month, etc.)
03-05-2010
There's no way on Earth to *know* whether this date is May 3rd or
March 5th.
So? (What's your point? We were talking about the ISO date format,
the ISO date format when time fields are present, and, earlier,
common local data formats. Your example clearly isn't one of the
first two. Are you claiming that some local data format uses that
component order _and_ uses hyphens?)
I interpreted Andrei's email as referring to the ambiguities in the
file *names* (like 03052010065.jpg), not the fs timestamps.
--
Dissent is patriotic, remember?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c07d1b3.6010...@cox.net
