Smallcaps font size

[Karellen]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

It's because of #3 that I have to do August 1, 2024. Otherwise, you (and others) might thing I mean January 8, 204 when I write (correctly) 08/01/2024. This is why #3 should go away as it causes no end of trouble for writing dates in numeric form.

@JSWolf. I am calling you out... This is for you...
(saw this and immediately thought of you)

[j.p.s]

Two digit years never make sense, regardless of the order.

[Aleron Ives]

They do if your data set has no entries that go beyond century boundaries.

[DNSB]

My personal preference is to use dd-MMM-YYYY (i.e. 20-Jan-2025). If I have to use a pure numeric form, then 2025-01-20 which is also the easiest to sort.

[j.p.s]

Data sets that stand the test of time will eventually do so.

Of particular interest here would be publication date and author date of birth.

Also why waste time and effort considering whether a date is or is not from the current century.

[j.p.s]

I prefer YYYY-MMM-dd for consistancy and ease of conversion. Alphabetic months combined with 4 digit years help reduce any lingering ambiguity provided the month names as written are known by all readers.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

I prefer YYYY-MMM-dd for consistancy and ease of conversion. Alphabetic months combined with 4 digit years help reduce any lingering ambiguity provided the month names as written are known by all readers.

Alphabetic months only work for some languages. I did use that for a few years till I encountered more not-English-speakers. So I use all numeric ISO, though I think adding 10000 to year might be a good idea to remove BC/AD, BCE/CE and make dates more than 2025 years ago simpler.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_calendar

I've not started using it generally, yet.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DNSB

My personal preference is to use dd-MMM-YYYY (i.e. 20-Jan-2025). If I have to use a pure numeric form, then 2025-01-20 which is also the easiest to sort.

My preference is for the world to adopt the ISO date standard of YYYY-MM-DD.

But for those who prefer DD-MM-YYYY, notice even the ISO standard does MM-DD.

[JSWolf]

Because we have people who read numeric dates differently, it's best to write the date as (today's date) Jan 21, 2025.

That is easy to read and provides no confusion. If I write 03/02/2025, am I writing March 02, 2025 or Feb 03, 2025?

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Because we have people who read numeric dates differently, it's best to write the date as (today's date) Jan 21, 2025.

That is easy to read and provides no confusion. If I write 03/02/2025, am I writing March 02, 2025 or Feb 03, 2025?

That's why there is an ISO format. Sorts in file names and unambigious.


"Jan 21, 2025" is American and English. Feel free to use it in the USA.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Quoth

That's why there is an ISO format. Sorts in file names and unambigious.


"Jan 21, 2025" is American and English. Feel free to use it in the USA.

Jan 21, 2025 is readable by everyone on the forum. There's no mistaking what date it is.

If I wrote a date such as 03/04/2025, would you know if it's March 04, 2025 or April 03, 2025? If you went with April, you'd be wrong.

[Renate]

The only sane format is 2025-01-21 13:01:02.123456789

That retains consistent greater to lesser units progression.

It can be approximated by deleting from the right.

(punctuation may be customized)

[DNSB]

For some strange reason, a XKCD cartoon comes to mind.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Renate

The only sane format is 2025-01-21 13:01:02.123456789

That retains consistent greater to lesser units progression.

It can be approximated by deleting from the right.

(punctuation may be customized)

Agree totally.