From reiter@netspace.net.au Sat May 06 03:25:52 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7470 invoked from network); 6 May 2000 10:25:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 May 2000 10:25:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO snufflelufagas.bofh.asn.au) (139.130.48.34) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 May 2000 10:25:49 -0000 Received: from river.UUCP (uucp@localhost) by snufflelufagas.bofh.asn.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) with UUCP id UAA15255; Sat, 6 May 2000 20:24:02 +1000 Received: by forest.bofh.asn.au via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.102) for lojban@egroups.com; Sat, 6 May 2000 16:46:37 +1000 (EST) To: pycyn@aol.com Cc: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Lojban / Most translated Web Page References: <3a.4b5c05b.264458bd@aol.com> Date: 06 May 2000 16:46:37 +1000 In-Reply-To: pycyn@aol.com's message of "Fri, 5 May 2000 13:02:53 EDT" Message-ID: Lines: 13 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Peter Moulder la'e cusku di'e > RECORD: date/time > Lojban, with practical ellipses in mind, rather than consistent order in a > larger-smaller dimension, records dates in DDMMYYYY order. > NOT ISO FWIW, I believe YYYYMMDD is an alternative ISO form. Compared to DDMMYYYY, it has advantages of monotonic increasing relationship between date and number interpretations (i.e. sortable), and I suspect is less likely to be misinterpreted by Americans than DDMMYYYY. co'o mi'e pijem.