Garth Almgren a dit : > Ian Davey wrote: > >> Garth Wallace wrote: >> >>> Glenn Miller wrote: >>> >>>> On 22 Mar 2002, Jay Garcia was seen to have posted this wee note >>>> into netscape.public.mozilla.general, to which I have responded as >>>> follows: >>>> >>>> >>>>> The build date is 03-14-2002 but that doesn't mean that it's using the >>>>> 0.9.9 Gecko engine. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I didn't know that there was a 14th month! >>>> >>>> Why not use the standard date of day/month/year - instead of some >>>> cockeyed arrangement with the day after the month but before the year. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "Standard date of day/month/year"? Huh? >>> >>> Are you British? >>> >> >> Least significant to most significant, or most significant to least >> significant does seem to be pretty much a standard. I've never really >> understood the logic behind the US format. >> >> It's not as you do "mm:ss:hh" or "mm:hh:ss" for time. Just one of >> those quirks of history I guess. >> >> ian. >> > > I don't know why we do it MM/DD/YYYY, but I'm guessing it has something > to do with spoken English overflowing into and influencing written English. > > When spoken aloud, "March 22nd, 2002" is less formal and more common > than "22nd of March, 2002." At least, that's how it works in my corner > of the USA. > > I see your point and like the idea of least to greatest, but many people > have been "trained" too well. Whenever I see something like 070101 I > immediately think "July 1st, 2001." >
Well, many *American* people ;-) I do not know any other people using this strange date format :-)) Pascal
