From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Fri Sep 21 17:33:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 22 Sep 2001 00:33:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 10336 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2001 00:33:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Sep 2001 00:33:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta05-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.45) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Sep 2001 00:33:29 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.255.40.171]) by mta05-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010922003327.TUUR20588.mta05-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 01:33:27 +0100 Reply-To: To: Subject: RE: [lojban] dates (was: Re: logical language and usage deciding Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 01:32:45 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" Xod: > We should reverse the principle of elision of pi'e, so we can have our > bigendian and also our day-centrism. > > 2001;09;17 (full date) > 2001;; (only the year) > 17 (just the day) Is that on the Wiki? Maybe it could go under Proposed Interpretive Conventions or nearby. Not that I myself am in favour of numbers for dates, but your suggestion has the virtue partly appeasing both camps. --And.