## 1179: "ISO 8601"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

webgiant
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:36 pm UTC

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Jorpho wrote:I guess different formats can serve different purposes, but I never liked DD-MM-YYYY. It might make logical sense, but it is just devoid of practicality.

But for the same reason, YYYY-MM-DD doesn't seem right in everyday use either. I mean, if you don't care about the year – and for most everyday applications, why would you? – you would just write MM-DD. It only makes sense to append additional superfluous information to the right.

This has been my reasoning. Unless you are a regular time traveler and need to make sure you get the year right, you know what year it is, and just need to keep the month and day sorted.

orthogon
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Klear wrote:
orthogon wrote:It seems to me that if those problems could be eradicated, nobody would care too much about the convention for showing North on a map.

The benefit of the convention is that if you look at any map, you don't have to check which way it is oriented. Of course putting south on top would be identical except that it's been like that for ages and with both orientations being identical, there's no benefit in changing it.

I meant that nobody would mind which convention was used, not that we wouldn't need a convention at all: we could use the "North-up" convention without fear of cultural imperialism. I definitely get very confused when a different orientation is used.
yurell wrote:if I'm looking at a map of my house, I'm wasting space if I orient north at the top, since the rectangular house would be put at an angle

I take your point, but would you accept a compromise in which North is within +/-45 degrees of up?
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

webgiant wrote:This has been my reasoning. Unless you are a regular time traveler and need to make sure you get the year right, you know what year it is, and just need to keep the month and day sorted.
The internet is my time machine and all of time and space* is my domain*!

*Limited to, say, 20 years of the past and none of the future. Past-accessibility may vary. No warranties implied or given.

*It's not actually my domain, it also looks like a placeholder page.

gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

phlip wrote:Oh, no, I wasn't accusing you of having that point of view. Just talking about the point of view where the terms "West" and "East" came from in this context.
But that is not where those terms come from.

Centering the map on Europe is, given the geography of the continents, the only logical way to draw a world map.
Even if that were true, which it isn't, the Eurocentric view *is*, in fact, where that terminology came from (in European languages, mind you), and it predates the widespread use of projected-onto-a-rectangle world maps.

European languages refer to parts Asia with varying degrees of eastness because those parts of Asia are varying distances to the east of where said European languages developed.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

OrenT wrote:The ISO8601 includes stuff like skipping the '-' or ':' separators, formats for week dates, ordinal dates and even allows the hour to be 24:00:00(!)

Or 23:59:60, for that matter.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

CharlieP wrote:
OrenT wrote:The ISO8601 includes stuff like skipping the '-' or ':' separators, formats for week dates, ordinal dates and even allows the hour to be 24:00:00(!)

Or 23:59:60, for that matter.

That reminds me of the 1 vs. 0.99999999999... discussions. Maybe this could be a good way to explain it to people without having to explain it? Nah, probably not.

servman
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:35 pm UTC

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

bmonk
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC
Location: Schitzoed in the OTT between the 2100s and the late 900s. Hoping for singularity.

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

phlip wrote:Right... you want maps that date from a time where all you have is Europe, Asia and Africa. The Americas and Australia didn't exist yet. And Africa didn't really count, we only care about places where people live, not Africans. Then, all the land that matters is a long stretch from west to east across Eurasia. From the point of view of someone in Europe, you have the West (meaning Western Europe), the Near East (meaning Eastern Europe), the Middle East (the only one of these terms that's still in common use) and the Far East (India and China).

Interestingly, the three continents were all one body of land--although Africa does have that nice narrow bits at the Sinai Desert to mark pretty well where it ends. Blame the Greeks--in their day, Europe was on one side of the water, and Asia on the other. Too bad the Euxine (Black) Sea doesn't reach the Ocean upstream as well as downstream.

As for orientation, originally European maps had East at the top--hence they were properly ORIENT-ed. This would actually tend to fit single sheets of paper better, while a North (or South) at the top fits a double sheet better.

I've also wondered how we will orient ourselves in the galaxy, once we begin to explore. My humble suggestion: Down is towards the Galaxy center, up towards the rim, and forward is towards the direction of spin with back trailing, which leaves left and right pointing out of the galactic plane. For two-dimensional representations of a portion of the disk, you would simply rotate it 90°, so spinward would probably be to the right (most languages read left-to-right) and trailing would be left.
Having become a Wizard on n.p. 2183, the Yellow Piggy retroactively appointed his honorable self a Temporal Wizardly Piggy on n.p.1488, not to be effective until n.p. 2183, thereby avoiding a partial temporal paradox. Since he couldn't afford two philosophical PhDs to rule on the title.

Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

bmonk wrote:As for orientation, originally European maps had East at the top--hence they were properly ORIENT-ed.

Is that a terrible pun, or awesome etymological insight?

This would actually tend to fit single sheets of paper better, while a North (or South) at the top fits a double sheet better.

How so? That depends on how much land in which direction is displayed, no? Or is it that the world was known farther on the west-east axis at that time?

Pfhorrest
Posts: 5447
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

bmonk wrote:I've also wondered how we will orient ourselves in the galaxy, once we begin to explore.

We've already got a galactic coordinate system in use today.

Klear wrote:
bmonk wrote:As for orientation, originally European maps had East at the top--hence they were properly ORIENT-ed.

Is that a terrible pun, or awesome etymological insight?

I would assume the latter, as that is the etymology of the verb "orient" (and derived terms like "orientation"); to figure out which way is east.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

servman wrote:FYI: You can Like it on Facebook here: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Internat ... 1308955783

Great. A fan page about ISO 8601 fails to use ISO 8601 properly.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

For computer to computer communication it's unnecessarily complex. And for anything involving humans it's unnecessarily hard to read.

"2013-03-06T13:55Z" is just a stupid way of writing times when communicating with another human being. Something like "2013-03-06, 13:55 UTC" would have been much clearer. Another weird thing is that decimal places are written with a comma instead of the much more international dot (both are allowed, but the comma is preferred). Then they allow all kinds of abnormal ways to write times or dates, which is unnecessary for computers and confusing for humans. For example "1325,5" means 13:25:30. Even worse is that 13:25.30 means 13:25:18. That's just utterly confusing.

When you get to time zones things get even weirder. You're not allowed to write "UTC" or any other timezone name. UTC is "Z" and other timezones are +-hh:mm. So 13:30+01:00. Again, unnecessarily complex for computers and just plain confusing for humans (13:30+01:00 means 12:30Z). If you had been allowed to write UTC as +00:00 then at least it would have been consistent, but oh no, we can't have that.

If are all this you still think this standard is a good idea, consider this: The year -0002 refers to 3 BCE! They included the non-existent year 0 in the standard, so all years before that are 1 year off.

The standard is a complete mess.

How it ever got to be a standard in the first place is beyond me.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

bmonk
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC
Location: Schitzoed in the OTT between the 2100s and the late 900s. Hoping for singularity.

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Klear wrote:
This would actually tend to fit single sheets of paper better, while a North (or South) at the top fits a double sheet better.

How so? That depends on how much land in which direction is displayed, no? Or is it that the world was known farther on the west-east axis at that time?

I was thinking of a map including the whole world. As you implied on your question, if only a portion is displayed, it doesn't matter, except when the portion is of a definite shape, such as Greenland, the British Isles--or Australia.

Pfhorrest wrote:
bmonk wrote:I've also wondered how we will orient ourselves in the galaxy, once we begin to explore.

We've already got a galactic coordinate system in use today.

True. But an Earth-centered coordinate system is not so good if we ever develop a large region of the Galaxy. I mean, even the Star Trek quadrant system seems rather silly to me in many ways--especially if the Federation is really supposed to be among equal members.
Having become a Wizard on n.p. 2183, the Yellow Piggy retroactively appointed his honorable self a Temporal Wizardly Piggy on n.p.1488, not to be effective until n.p. 2183, thereby avoiding a partial temporal paradox. Since he couldn't afford two philosophical PhDs to rule on the title.

Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

bmonk wrote:I was thinking of a map including the whole world. As you implied on your question, if only a portion is displayed, it doesn't matter, except when the portion is of a definite shape, such as Greenland, the British Isles--or Australia.

Right. I thought that you were talking about maps back when east was on top. At that time "whole world" was a completely different thing.

bmonk wrote:I mean, even the Star Trek quadrant system seems rather silly to me in many ways--especially if the Federation is really supposed to be among equal members.

The federation is actually located in Alpha Quadrant, though it has expanded significantly into the Beta Quadrant as well.

Pfhorrest
Posts: 5447
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Klear wrote:
bmonk wrote:I mean, even the Star Trek quadrant system seems rather silly to me in many ways--especially if the Federation is really supposed to be among equal members.

The federation is actually located in Alpha Quadrant, though it has expanded significantly into the Beta Quadrant as well.

Earth is on the border between the Alpha and Beta quadrants though, which I think was his point: the quadrant system seems designed around the location of Earth.

Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Pfhorrest wrote: For that matter, why the hell didn't Voyager's course home involve taking a shortcut through the Bajoran Wormhole, skipping over large portions of the Gamma and Alpha quadrants on their way home, instead of flying the long way through the whole Beta quadrant).

Because then they wouldn't have had access to the Borg transwarp hub, and had a decent chance of spending most of their time with aliens they'd already seen before (which wouldn't be very explorer-y). Besides, Janeway's decision making, and willingness to sacrifice herself, is definitely questionable since she could have just accepted Q's offer for instant teleportation home.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?

bmonk
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC
Location: Schitzoed in the OTT between the 2100s and the late 900s. Hoping for singularity.

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Pfhorrest wrote:
Klear wrote:
bmonk wrote:I mean, even the Star Trek quadrant system seems rather silly to me in many ways--especially if the Federation is really supposed to be among equal members.

The federation is actually located in Alpha Quadrant, though it has expanded significantly into the Beta Quadrant as well.

Earth is on the border between the Alpha and Beta quadrants though, which I think was his point: the quadrant system seems designed around the location of Earth.

Precisely--and in an earlier incarnation, the quadrants were not really a quarter of the galaxy, since both dividing lines passed through Earth in one map I saw. So that two of the quadrants--Alpha and Beta, IIRC, were just a slice of the edge of the galaxy, while Gamma and Delta included half the core each.
Having become a Wizard on n.p. 2183, the Yellow Piggy retroactively appointed his honorable self a Temporal Wizardly Piggy on n.p.1488, not to be effective until n.p. 2183, thereby avoiding a partial temporal paradox. Since he couldn't afford two philosophical PhDs to rule on the title.

yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

In the early days of Star Trek the terminology was quite volatile, but the Star Trek: Star Charts book sorts it out; each of the quadrants are a quarter of the galaxy each, including the core.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?

Mr Q
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 11:51 am UTC
Location: Perth, Australia

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

da Doctah wrote:
Klear wrote:Far East is only used in historical context, and slightly less than "orient", which means simply "east".

It always bothered me, growing up in California, that to get to the part of the world called the "Far East", you had to go west (unless you were flying, in which case you had to go north), and that the much-touted "midwest" was to the east.

Well it always annoys the living shit out of me when something is listed as "released in the spring" (insert your season here).

Which spring? When I think of spring, I think Sep/Oct/Nov, not Mar/Apr/May. Because I've lived nearly my entire life in the southern hemisphere. Hell, even the bit I lived in the UK, I still had to think about it. I always prefer it when someone uses something like Q2, 2013. At least it's unambigous (and I'd be fine with 2013, Q2).

Angelastic
Posts: 700
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:36 am UTC
Location: .at (let's see what's through here!)
Contact:

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Mr Q wrote:Well it always annoys the living shit out of me when something is listed as "released in the spring" (insert your season here).

Me too. Not just because I'm from the Southern hemisphere (and now live in the Northern) but because I never learnt to automatically associate seasons with months in the first place. I always have to work backwards from Christmas=(winter in Northern Hemisphere fiction, therefore summer) to figure out when a given season is likely to be. And even that only gives a vague result which may be six months out depending on my ability to infer the hemisphere of whoever wrote the phrase.

I assume they do it because they don't actually know when the product will be ready, so they want to be as vague as possible. Or weather or day length is actually relevant to the product, but I can't think of any instances of that.
Knight Temporal, and Archdeacon of buttermongery and ham and cheese sandwiches. Nobody sells butter except through me.
Smiley by yappobiscuits. Avatar by GLR, buffygirl, BlitzGirl & mscha, with cari.j.elliot's idea.
Haiku Detector
starts a trend to make way for
my robot army.

yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Those season things annoy me, because 1) I too don't associate months with season (have to work back from December = Summer), and 2) they're invariably six months off (if you can pay enough attention to raise the price by 50% here, you can rename a season on an ad).
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?

Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

I'm from Europe, but I always had another problem with seasons - at school you learn that it's spring/summer/autumn/winter, but January and February are still winter from the past year. It took me quite some time to realize spring is not the first season of the year.

It would be better if year began with March. Not only would it begin with spring, but names of months like "september", "october" etc. would make sense.

Pfhorrest
Posts: 5447
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Klear wrote:It would be better if the year still began with March. Not only would it begin with spring, but names of months like "september", "october" etc. would make sense.

FTFY. (The definite article's a freebie ;] ).

But to really do it right we'd have to shift everything by 20-21 days in addition to that. Start March on what's now March 20th, the start of spring, otherwise most of March would still be in winter technically.

Of course, it'd be easier to shift everything back by 10 days instead, to start the year on the winter solstice. Then the year still starts at the nadir of the cycle rather than the x-intersection, just like our clocks do, and you get four even seasons in a year like you want: winter, spring, summer, and fall. (♫ All you have to do is call... ♫)
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Contact:

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Klear wrote:I'm from Europe, but I always had another problem with seasons - at school you learn that it's spring/summer/autumn/winter, but January and February are still winter from the past year. It took me quite some time to realize spring is not the first season of the year.
I still get thrown off that, just looking at spring and fall, spring comes first in the calendar year but fall comes first in the academic year. The first semester in a year is fall, and the second is spring...

Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Pfhorrest wrote:
Klear wrote:It would be better if the year still began with March. Not only would it begin with spring, but names of months like "september", "october" etc. would make sense.

FTFY. (The definite article's a freebie ;] ).

I'm aware that's how it used to be, but it's (still) true without the "still" and I didn't want to complicate it. But thanks for the definite article. I keep losing them, and then the bastards sometimes pop up somewhere they don't belong at all...

futnuh
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:05 am UTC

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

For the past 8 years my company has been using a date format wherein the month is represented by its corresponding letter of the alphabet. So, for example, 'A' for January, 'B' for February, …, up to 'L' for December. My date format is YYMDD. So, today being March 8, 2013, I'd write this as 13C08. This date format both sorts chronologically and is unambiguous in the month. Here's a few files from 2012 receipts folder as examples,

12L12-Taxi.pdf
12L14-Blenz.pdf
12L14-Taxi1.pdf
12L18-MRM.pdf
12L21-VoicesDotCom.pdf
12L22-Indiegogo.pdf
12L23-Staples.pdf
12L23-iTunes.pdf
12L30-LondonDrugs.pdf

Works very nicely.

Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

futnuh wrote:So, for example, 'A' for January, 'B' for February, …, up to 'L' for December.
You are all terrible people.

orthogon
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

futnuh wrote:So, for example, 'A' for January, 'B' for February, …, up to 'L' for December.

This system addresses the ambiguity as to whether J represents June or July, by having it represent October instead!

 Or January. January also begins with a J. I forgot about January.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

CantWaitForEy
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:58 pm UTC

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

futnuh wrote:So, for example, 'A' for January, 'B' for February, …, up to 'L' for December.

We definitely need to rename the months. At least two of them are named after Roman emperors, what's up with that. So I propose that everybody should use, for the sake of simplicity:

Ajuary, Bebruary, Carch, Dapril, Ey, Fune, Guly, Haugust, Iptember, Joctober, Kovember, Lecember

Or shorten them right away:

Ajy, Beby, Carch, Dap, Ey, Fun, Gul, Hau, Ipt, Joc, Kov, Lec

Then everything is in order and nobody will get confused any more. Optimal solution!

mikrit
Posts: 402
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 8:13 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

bmonk wrote:
Klear wrote:
bmonk wrote:This would actually tend to fit single sheets of paper better, while a North (or South) at the top fits a double sheet better.

How so? That depends on how much land in which direction is displayed, no? Or is it that the world was known farther on the west-east axis at that time?

I was thinking of a map including the whole world.

So the pergament printing machines of the ancients didn't have the option to switch orientation from portrait to landscape?
Hatted and wimpled by ergman.
Dubbed "First and Eldest of Ottificators" by svenman.
Febrion wrote: "etc" is latin for "this would look better with more examples, but I can't think of any".

Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

bmonk wrote:
Klear wrote:
This would actually tend to fit single sheets of paper better, while a North (or South) at the top fits a double sheet better.

How so? That depends on how much land in which direction is displayed, no? Or is it that the world was known farther on the west-east axis at that time?

I was thinking of a map including the whole world. As you implied on your question, if only a portion is displayed, it doesn't matter, except when the portion is of a definite shape, such as Greenland, the British Isles--or Australia.

Pfhorrest wrote:
bmonk wrote:I've also wondered how we will orient ourselves in the galaxy, once we begin to explore.

We've already got a galactic coordinate system in use today.

True. But an Earth-centered coordinate system is not so good if we ever develop a large region of the Galaxy. I mean, even the Star Trek quadrant system seems rather silly to me in many ways--especially if the Federation is really supposed to be among equal members.

Earth is in Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha, everybody knows that.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

orthogon
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

CantWaitForEy wrote:
futnuh wrote:So, for example, 'A' for January, 'B' for February, …, up to 'L' for December.

We definitely need to rename the months. At least two of them are named after Roman emperors, what's up with that. So I propose that everybody should use, for the sake of simplicity:

Ajuary, Bebruary, Carch, Dapril, Ey, Fune, Guly, Haugust, Iptember, Joctober, Kovember, Lecember

Or shorten them right away:

Ajy, Beby, Carch, Dap, Ey, Fun, Gul, Hau, Ipt, Joc, Kov, Lec

Then everything is in order and nobody will get confused any more. Optimal solution!

These are brilliant. "Ajuary" sounds like you're still drunk from the new year party, "Bebruary" is February transformed by a blocked nose, "carch" is the cough you're left with for a month after you fight off the winter cold.
Presumably Joctober is when the university sports season begins?

My only suggestion before you send it to ISO for ratification: "ey" could be confused with "A" for Ajuary in speech. Maybe "emy" or something? Unfortunately you'd have to change your alias though.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

mikrit
Posts: 402
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 8:13 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

CantWaitForEy wrote:
futnuh wrote:So, for example, 'A' for January, 'B' for February, …, up to 'L' for December.

We definitely need to rename the months. At least two of them are named after Roman emperors, what's up with that. So I propose that everybody should use, for the sake of simplicity:

Ajuary, Bebruary, Carch, Dapril, Ey, Fune, Guly, Haugust, Iptember, Joctober, Kovember, Lecember

Very good. But a capital I is easy to mistake for the digit 1, so we ought to skip I (as in the MGRS notation).

Let's see: then we get: Jeptember, Koctober, Lovember and Mecember.
Abbreviated Jep, Koc, Love and Mec.
(Okay, maybe not quite good, but I do like Lovember.)
Hatted and wimpled by ergman.
Dubbed "First and Eldest of Ottificators" by svenman.
Febrion wrote: "etc" is latin for "this would look better with more examples, but I can't think of any".

Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

mikrit wrote:
CantWaitForEy wrote:
futnuh wrote:So, for example, 'A' for January, 'B' for February, …, up to 'L' for December.

We definitely need to rename the months. At least two of them are named after Roman emperors, what's up with that. So I propose that everybody should use, for the sake of simplicity:

Ajuary, Bebruary, Carch, Dapril, Ey, Fune, Guly, Haugust, Iptember, Joctober, Kovember, Lecember

Very good. But a capital I is easy to mistake for the digit 1, so we ought to skip I (as in the MGRS notation).

Let's see: then we get: Jeptember, Koctober, Lovember and Mecember.
Abbreviated Jep, Koc, Love and Mec.
(Okay, maybe not quite good, but I do like Lovember.)

I am Diadem and I approve this message.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Ekaros
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:37 am UTC

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Mr Q wrote:
da Doctah wrote:
Klear wrote:Far East is only used in historical context, and slightly less than "orient", which means simply "east".

It always bothered me, growing up in California, that to get to the part of the world called the "Far East", you had to go west (unless you were flying, in which case you had to go north), and that the much-touted "midwest" was to the east.

Well it always annoys the living shit out of me when something is listed as "released in the spring" (insert your season here).

Which spring? When I think of spring, I think Sep/Oct/Nov, not Mar/Apr/May. Because I've lived nearly my entire life in the southern hemisphere. Hell, even the bit I lived in the UK, I still had to think about it. I always prefer it when someone uses something like Q2, 2013. At least it's unambigous (and I'd be fine with 2013, Q2).

Are we talking about bussiness quaters here or quaters of year ;D

yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

Or the school year (since I understand the start date is the middle of the year for northern hemisphere people)?
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?

JoSch
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:03 pm UTC

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

I find that 3179-1-70 looks stupid and prefer the usual Setting Orange, 70. Chaos, 3179 YOLD

bmonk
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC
Location: Schitzoed in the OTT between the 2100s and the late 900s. Hoping for singularity.

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

mikrit wrote:
CantWaitForEy wrote:
futnuh wrote:So, for example, 'A' for January, 'B' for February, …, up to 'L' for December.

We definitely need to rename the months. At least two of them are named after Roman emperors, what's up with that. So I propose that everybody should use, for the sake of simplicity:

Ajuary, Bebruary, Carch, Dapril, Ey, Fune, Guly, Haugust, Iptember, Joctober, Kovember, Lecember

Very good. But a capital I is easy to mistake for the digit 1, so we ought to skip I (as in the MGRS notation).

Let's see: then we get: Jeptember, Koctober, Lovember and Mecember.
Abbreviated Jep, Koc, Love and Mec.
(Okay, maybe not quite good, but I do like Lovember.)

This whole subthread reminds me of the Y-to-K program that produced: Januark, Februark, March, April, Mak, June, Julk . . . (and, as a bonus, Sundak, Mondak . . .)
Having become a Wizard on n.p. 2183, the Yellow Piggy retroactively appointed his honorable self a Temporal Wizardly Piggy on n.p.1488, not to be effective until n.p. 2183, thereby avoiding a partial temporal paradox. Since he couldn't afford two philosophical PhDs to rule on the title.

davemenc
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:14 pm UTC

### Re: 1179: "ISO 8601"

I'm a bit behind but I just realized that this one used my birthday as the example date.

That's gotta mean something!

But what, exactly...

mattme
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 3:17 pm UTC
Location: Cambridge, UK

### Hypocrisy

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. From http://www.xkcd.com/archive/

Code: Select all

<a href="/1179/" title="2013-2-27">ISO 8601</a><br/>