Quicksilver wrote:it should just be DD/MM/YYYY. Makes the most sense.
Area Man wrote:Quicksilver wrote:it should just be DD/MM/YYYY. Makes the most sense.
No! Would you seriously write time as ss:mm:hh? or mm:ss:hh? No. The date is just an extension of that. L-R is big to small (more precision further right, like normal numbers).
speedyjohn wrote:Is there a reason all the Roman numerals are off? It's not MMXII (2012), it's MMXIII (2013). And LVII/CCLXV is 57/265. But February 27 is 58/365.
Source: The CIA World Factbook, Appendix GAt this time, only three countries - Burma, Liberia, and the US - have not adopted the International System of Units (SI, or metric system) as their official system of weights and measures. Although use of the metric system has been sanctioned by law in the US since 1866, it has been slow in displacing the American adaptation of the British Imperial System known as the US Customary System. The US is the only industrialized nation that does not mainly use the metric system in its commercial and standards activities, but there is increasing acceptance in science, medicine, government, and many sectors of industry.
by simcop2387 » 2.26.13:10.21pm UTC
Is anyone else mildly upset that he got the roman numerals wrong? MMXII, come on! It's not like he's writing a check.
maxmaxmaxmax wrote:any explanation on 1330300800?
by sherlip » 02_26_2013 10:55 pm UTC
Am I the only one not getting the
2 3 1 4
0 1 2 3 7
5 67 8
Because it confuses the hell out of me...
simcop2387 wrote:1330300800 == unix time for Feb 27 2012. I think he made this comic to screw with us.
For the equation one, the / aren't division. they are seperators
Farabor wrote:Quick, someone post the xkcd about "There's too many standards, we need a universal standard!" Standard++ result. I would, but I don't do html or research .
Jorpho wrote: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.
JohnTheWysard wrote:Some traditionalists will still insist on V Calends Mars anno conditae urbis MMDCCLXI.
StClair wrote:I use YYYYMMDD for naming text files, saved webcomic images, etc - stuff that I'm going to keep on a computer, which will sort it for me - but in day to day life, I still write DD/MM/YYYY and probably always will.
Exodies wrote:I'll go even further, it is the least blotchy of any material or immaterial object existing or imagined at any time in this or any other universe, conceivable or not.
elej wrote:i liked this one, though the alt text left me trying to puzzle out which format he is using
Pfhorrest wrote:As someone who is not easily offended, I don't really mind anything in this conversation.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:It was the Renaissance. Everyone was Italian.
cwolves wrote:As great as standards are, this is the wrong way to way to write a date.
Results are more important than standards.
Steeler wrote:To hell with numerical dates. I write DD<three letter month abbreviation>YYYY on anything I have any control over. Completely unambiguous. Web forms generally tell you explicitly what they want, so they're not a big issue either.