How does one write the date in POV source files?  DD/MM/YY, or that
inexplicable style MM/DD/YY?
I can see the logic to the first style, it follows a clear order, but the
second?  Thankfully, I can't recall any modern nation that uses
it.....there's some country between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, but
last I heard, they hadn't even adopted the metric system!  :-P
BTW: It has been mentioned before on this server, that to use two different
styles of English (i.e. English and American) in one publication is very
poor style indeed.  Not only does the parser allow for this kind of nonsense
(why it is bi-lingual I will never know), but the source is full of it.  No,
it doesn't really matter, it's just a little unfortunate.

Post a reply to this message

"Edward C." wrote:
> 
> How does one write the date in POV source files?  DD/MM/YY, or that
> inexplicable style MM/DD/YY?
> I can see the logic to the first style, it follows a clear order, but the
> second?  Thankfully, I can't recall any modern nation that uses
> it.....there's some country between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, but
> last I heard, they hadn't even adopted the metric system!  :-P
> BTW: It has been mentioned before on this server, that to use two different
> styles of English (i.e. English and American) in one publication is very
> poor style indeed.  Not only does the parser allow for this kind of nonsense
> (why it is bi-lingual I will never know), but the source is full of it.  No,
> it doesn't really matter, it's just a little unfortunate.

 The US uses an alpha numeric form of date designation. In long form it
would appear as:

 Dec. 1 1999 (12/01/99)

  as opposed to

 1 Dec. 1999 (01/12/99)

as you seem to be comfortable with. I personaly find the US version logical
and cannot imagine why anyone would want to do it differently. After all if
it is good enough for the people of the US it should be good enough for the
rest of the people on this planet.

 As to the rest of your language rants I am not even going to touch that
as it is an overly discussed topic that has been fairly well resolved to
everyone else's satisfaction.

-- 
Ken Tyler

See my 850+ Povray and 3D Rendering and Raytracing Links at:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html

Post a reply to this message

As a child, I learned the USA system of dating. I understood it, I used it, and
found nothing wrong with it. When I changed over to Panamanian schools, I was
hit with the reality that they didn't work that way. After a few months, I had
changed over to their system. Now, I find nothing wrong with this one. My father
still uses the USA system, since he is not in school. In my own personal papers
and pov script files, I have taken to using the D/M/Y system. It is times like
this that I feel detached from my North American roots and I feel kinda sad
about having 2 nationalities and living in the country I like least of the two.
Perhaps I should detach from both nationalities and start using the Japanese
system (Y/M/D). To breifly explain it, to them I was more important to know in
what year of what Emperor's reign they were, than to know what month or day they
were living.

-- 
Anthony L. Bennett
http://welcome.to/TonyB

Non nova, sed nove.

Post a reply to this message

<note> Please note - It seems the last sentance in my previous post was not
sufficient, the post should have included <rant> </rant> markers.  I'm
deeply sorry for this omission. </note>
<question> But if I may restate my still un-answered question:  Which short
format is/should be used in POV source - or is it not important to discern
between the 12th of Janurary and the 1st of December in a given year?
</question>
<rant> ...grumble grumble... of course if POV were mono-lingual, there
wouldn't be ambiguity... mumble mumble...</rant>
<aside> BTW:  That Y/M/D is cool, a bit like MSB first format, where D/M/Y
is LSB first format, and M/D/Y is.... </aside>

Post a reply to this message

All in all there is an iso standard somewhere where dates should be wriiten
in the format YYYYMMDD... that is

23rd September 2009 will be written as 20090923.

This does makes a lot of sense in the computer world. I mark all my backup
files in that format. So when I categorise i.e. sort them they are
automatically sorted year first, then month and then date. Makes a lot more
sense to archive them with the least amount of information first and then
moving into the details....

BR/Saadat

Edward C. <edw### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:37db4115@news.povray.org...
> <note> Please note - It seems the last sentance in my previous post was
not
> sufficient, the post should have included <rant> </rant> markers.  I'm
> deeply sorry for this omission. </note>
> <question> But if I may restate my still un-answered question:  Which
short
> format is/should be used in POV source - or is it not important to discern
> between the 12th of Janurary and the 1st of December in a given year?
> </question>
> <rant> ...grumble grumble... of course if POV were mono-lingual, there
> wouldn't be ambiguity... mumble mumble...</rant>
> <aside> BTW:  That Y/M/D is cool, a bit like MSB first format, where D/M/Y
> is LSB first format, and M/D/Y is.... </aside>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

"Edward C." wrote:

> How does one write the date in POV source files?  DD/MM/YY, or that
> inexplicable style MM/DD/YY?
> I can see the logic to the first style, it follows a clear order, but the
> second?  Thankfully, I can't recall any modern nation that uses
> it.....there's some country between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, but
> last I heard, they hadn't even adopted the metric system!  :-P
> BTW: It has been mentioned before on this server, that to use two different
> styles of English (i.e. English and American) in one publication is very
> poor style indeed.  Not only does the parser allow for this kind of nonsense
> (why it is bi-lingual I will never know), but the source is full of it.  No,
> it doesn't really matter, it's just a little unfortunate.

	This sounds almost insulting to the universe in general. 

	Any rational person writes YYMMDD so tha core sorting routines
can be used. 

	Tougne out of cheek. 

	Is that a good enough answer?

Post a reply to this message

Matt Giwer wrote:

>         Any rational person writes YYMMDD so tha core sorting routines
> can be used.

Only programmers are conceited enough to think that the rest of the world
should be structured for their convenience where dates are concerned.

-- 
Ken Tyler

See my 850+ Povray and 3D Rendering and Raytracing Links at:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html

Post a reply to this message

Hi Edward C., you recently wrote in povray.programming:

> How does one write the date in POV source files?  DD/MM/YY, or that
> inexplicable style MM/DD/YY?
Mostly in Europe (as far as I have experienced), the format used is
DD.MM.YY. Using dots instead of slashes is the way I identify which
system is being used. I think using DD/MM/YY is always going to be
confusing because the USA uses the MM/DD/YY format.

- Lutz
  email : lut### [at] stmuccom
  Web   : http://www.stmuc.com/moray

Post a reply to this message

Even though I was born in the US and am a product
of public education here, I have adjusted to the more
"logical(?)" DD/MM/YY format. To me, it is a mater of
going from the smallest unit to the largest unit.
If it helps you to understand, I also model in 1=1 meter
scale, if I can get away with it I use a 24 hr clock, and a
Dvorak keyboard. I guess that I am not the "standerd
American".
Mr. Art

"Edward C." wrote:

> How does one write the date in POV source files?  DD/MM/YY, or that
> inexplicable style MM/DD/YY?
> I can see the logic to the first style, it follows a clear order, but the
> second?  Thankfully, I can't recall any modern nation that uses
> it.....there's some country between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, but
> last I heard, they hadn't even adopted the metric system!  :-P
> BTW: It has been mentioned before on this server, that to use two different
> styles of English (i.e. English and American) in one publication is very
> poor style indeed.  Not only does the parser allow for this kind of nonsense
> (why it is bi-lingual I will never know), but the source is full of it.  No,
> it doesn't really matter, it's just a little unfortunate.

Post a reply to this message

I apologise for the stir my initial post caused here, I had a simple
question, which I decided to make a little more interesting with some sort
of humour.  A great deal of that humour was interpereted as nasty little
digs (which in hindsight, is exactly how it is written).  In future I will
try to keep my humour a little more conventional.
As for resolving the question, I will use either YYYYMMDD format or DD.MM.YY
format as appropriate.
I will not post to this thread again, and will cancel what I have posted,
including this message, within a week.

P.S.  In future, if I make, or anyone else makes a comment which sounds
inappropriate, it is probably a good idea to assume, at least initially,
that they are trying to be funny.  I don't think anyone comes here just to
be rude.

Post a reply to this message

"Edward C." wrote:
> 
> I apologise for the stir my initial post caused here, I had a simple
> question, which I decided to make a little more interesting with some sort
> of humour.  A great deal of that humour was interpereted as nasty little
> digs (which in hindsight, is exactly how it is written).  In future I will
> try to keep my humour a little more conventional.
> As for resolving the question, I will use either YYYYMMDD format or DD.MM.YY
> format as appropriate.
> I will not post to this thread again, and will cancel what I have posted,
> including this message, within a week.
> 
> P.S.  In future, if I make, or anyone else makes a comment which sounds
> inappropriate, it is probably a good idea to assume, at least initially,
> that they are trying to be funny.  I don't think anyone comes here just to
> be rude.

Edward,

  I took your message as partly humorous :) and perhaps my one reply :)
lacked in the needed quantity of smiley's :) :) to convey my one stance
on the date issue. Personaly if I were you I would wait to cancel your
message at least until Ron comes online tommorrow morning and let's you
know what the povray source code dating convention is :)

You must also remember :) that Americans such as myself :) are arrogant
and head strong :) and we staunchly defend our position on such things :)
right or wrong :) Don't take it personaly :)

-- 
Ken Tyler

See my 850+ Povray and 3D Rendering and Raytracing Links at:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 12 Sep 1999 18:21:29 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
>  I took your message as partly humorous :) and perhaps my one reply :)
>lacked in the needed quantity of smiley's :) :) to convey my one stance
>on the date issue. Personaly if I were you I would wait to cancel your
>message at least until Ron comes online tommorrow morning and let's you
>know what the povray source code dating convention is :)

I'm online on the weekends too, you know.  Just not as continuously.  I
just did a quick survey of the code and it appears that the official POV 
dating convention is... none.  That's right, it depends on who wrote the
code.  Most of the official comments seem to be of the form "Oct 1996",
with no day, thus making it a moot point.  Of the ones who use days, I
see at least the "10-31-1996" format and the "31 October 1996" format,
but it seems to vary widely.  That, and I'm using my unofficial Superpatch
source here so it probably varies more widely than the official source.
Like everything else in POV, it seems to reflect the individuality of 
the team members and other contributors.  I happen to think that's a
good thing.  Personally, I use the "31 Oct. 1996" format both in POV
and in my real life.  And I'm an American, believe it or not. 

The original poster was right that the source is a bit schizo on the 
issue of colo[u]r, but it tends to use the English spelling fairly
consistently in places where it matters to the programmer (only one 
exception that I could find, Color_Bits) and it uses the American
spelling in user-interface code.  Comments seem to depend on who 
wrote them.  Personally, I find myself writing the English spelling
even when I'm posting here, just because I've gotten used to typing
it that way in code.

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker wrote:

> > Personaly if I were you I would wait to cancel your
> >message at least until Ron comes online tommorrow morning and let's you
> >know what the povray source code dating convention is :)
> 
> I'm online on the weekends too, you know.  Just not as continuously.

  Your presence here is conspicously less on weekends than it is on
weekdays. Not that I'm keeping track mind you...

-- 
Ken Tyler

See my 850+ Povray and 3D Rendering and Raytracing Links at:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html

Post a reply to this message

This is the starting part of Universal Time. The rest of it includes hours,
minutes and seconds with as many decimals as needed for accuracy. Universal
Time is used by astronomers to eliminate all the various confusing civilian
local methods of measuring and reporting time. Each local can be converted from
Universal, of course. With Universal Time there is global agreement on both its
format and its meaning.

steve



Saadat Saeed wrote:

> All in all there is an iso standard somewhere where dates should be wriiten
> in the format YYYYMMDD... that is
>
> 23rd September 2009 will be written as 20090923.
>
> This does makes a lot of sense in the computer world. I mark all my backup
> files in that format. So when I categorise i.e. sort them they are
> automatically sorted year first, then month and then date. Makes a lot more
> sense to archive them with the least amount of information first and then
> moving into the details....
>
> BR/Saadat
>
> Edward C. <edw### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
> news:37db4115@news.povray.org...
> > <note> Please note - It seems the last sentance in my previous post was
> not
> > sufficient, the post should have included <rant> </rant> markers.  I'm
> > deeply sorry for this omission. </note>
> > <question> But if I may restate my still un-answered question:  Which
> short
> > format is/should be used in POV source - or is it not important to discern
> > between the 12th of Janurary and the 1st of December in a given year?
> > </question>
> > <rant> ...grumble grumble... of course if POV were mono-lingual, there
> > wouldn't be ambiguity... mumble mumble...</rant>
> > <aside> BTW:  That Y/M/D is cool, a bit like MSB first format, where D/M/Y
> > is LSB first format, and M/D/Y is.... </aside>
> >
> >

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 12 Sep 1999 03:48:49 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:

>
>
>Matt Giwer wrote:
>
>>         Any rational person writes YYMMDD so tha core sorting routines
>> can be used.
>
>Only programmers are conceited enough to think that the rest of the world
>should be structured for their convenience where dates are concerned.

Well Ken, what does that make me? I prefer the YYMMDD system for many
things myself. I don't consider myself a programmer though. I'm also
not Japanese, nor do I have any significant connection to Japan or
Japanese culture. 

That ISO standard simply made a lot of sense to me. I suppose this
makes me "logical" ?         :)

later,
Glen

To reply via email, remove the "7" from nos### [at] ezwvcom

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 12 Sep 1999 08:05:36 -0800, "Mr. Art" <mr.### [at] gcinet> wrote:

>Even though I was born in the US and am a product
>of public education here, I have adjusted to the more
>"logical(?)" DD/MM/YY format. To me, it is a mater of
>going from the smallest unit to the largest unit.
>If it helps you to understand, I also model in 1=1 meter
>scale, if I can get away with it I use a 24 hr clock, and a
>Dvorak keyboard. I guess that I am not the "standerd
>American".
>Mr. Art
>

Hmmm...

If you truly want "logical", adopt the standard of YYYYMMDD for dates.
I applaud you for using meters as your metric of choice. It's also a
good sign that you see advantages to the 24hr clock. However, wasn't
the Dvorak keyboard shown in independent testing to *not* have the
advantages claimed for it by it's inventor? Now, if you had said you
like chord keyboards for their innovation and potential for one-handed
operation, I would have given you extra points.    :)

Later,
Glen Berry

To reply via email, remove the "7" from nos### [at] ezwvcom

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 12 Sep 1999 20:52:43 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:

>
>
>Ron Parker wrote:
>
>> > Personaly if I were you I would wait to cancel your
>> >message at least until Ron comes online tommorrow morning and let's you
>> >know what the povray source code dating convention is :)
>> 
>> I'm online on the weekends too, you know.  Just not as continuously.
>
>  Your presence here is conspicously less on weekends than it is on
>weekdays. Not that I'm keeping track mind you...

Admit it. You've been monitoring Ron. You've been monitoring all of
us. You're not even human. You're an NSA computer program dedicated to
keeping tabs on all the international POV-Users. Left unchecked,
there's no telling what threat a bunch of international raytracing
enthusiasts could pose to the world. You even have the audacity to
publish a profile of all our web site URL's under the guise of "good
will.." Ken's links, indeed.


Later,
Glen Berry

P.S.
:)  :)  :)  :)  :)  :)

To reply via email, remove the "7" from nos### [at] ezwvcom

Post a reply to this message

Glen Berry wrote:

> >> I'm online on the weekends too, you know.  Just not as continuously.
> >
> >  Your presence here is conspicously less on weekends than it is on
> >weekdays. Not that I'm keeping track mind you...
> 
> Admit it. You've been monitoring Ron. You've been monitoring all of
> us. You're not even human. You're an NSA computer program dedicated to
> keeping tabs on all the international POV-Users. Left unchecked,
> there's no telling what threat a bunch of international raytracing
> enthusiasts could pose to the world. You even have the audacity to
> publish a profile of all our web site URL's under the guise of "good
> will.." Ken's links, indeed.
> 
> Later,
> Glen Berry

I've got your number...

Mine is MMDDYY...

-- 
Ken Tyler

See my 1000+ Povray and 3D Rendering and Raytracing Links at:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html

Post a reply to this message

Glen Berry wrote:

> On Sun, 12 Sep 1999 08:05:36 -0800, "Mr. Art" <mr.### [at] gcinet> wrote:
>
> >Even though I was born in the US and am a product
> >of public education here, I have adjusted to the more
> >"logical(?)" DD/MM/YY format. To me, it is a mater of
> >going from the smallest unit to the largest unit.
> >If it helps you to understand, I also model in 1=1 meter
> >scale, if I can get away with it I use a 24 hr clock, and a
> >Dvorak keyboard. I guess that I am not the "standerd
> >American".
> >Mr. Art
> >
>
> Hmmm...
>
> If you truly want "logical", adopt the standard of YYYYMMDD for dates.
> I applaud you for using meters as your metric of choice. It's also a
> good sign that you see advantages to the 24hr clock. However, wasn't
> the Dvorak keyboard shown in independent testing to *not* have the
>
> advantages claimed for it by it's inventor?
>

Well, as far as I can find, the major tests showing advantages were those
conducted by Dvorak himself in the US military. Other recent testing
mentioned by pro-Dvorak people show perhaps a 4-6% increase in
performance over QWERTY at best.

Post a reply to this message

The biggest advantage that I can find is that
my hands don't have to move as much when typing.
I have been rough on my body over the years and
arthritis can be a problem.
The difficulty is that my mind still wants to find some of
the letters in their old  ',.pyf {QWERTY}:)  places.

And of course, I _love_ to be unconventional.

Mr. Art

"Jon A. Cruz" wrote:

> Glen Berry wrote:
>
> Well, as far as I can find, the major tests showing advantages were those
> conducted by Dvorak himself in the US military. Other recent testing
> mentioned by pro-Dvorak people show perhaps a 4-6% increase in
> performance over QWERTY at best.

Post a reply to this message

I know. That was one thing I was expecting also. But when I looked into this a
while ago (in response to a post on a comp.engineering board) I couldn't find
anything definitive on this. Basically I saw conjecture that the Dvorak layout
might be better ergonomically, but I've yet to see any studies that verified
this.

"Mr. Art" wrote:

> The biggest advantage that I can find is that
> my hands don't have to move as much when typing.
> I have been rough on my body over the years and
> arthritis can be a problem.
> The difficulty is that my mind still wants to find some of
> the letters in their old  ',.pyf {QWERTY}:)  places.
>
> And of course, I _love_ to be unconventional.
>
> Mr. Art
>
> "Jon A. Cruz" wrote:
>
> > Glen Berry wrote:
> >
> > Well, as far as I can find, the major tests showing advantages were those
> > conducted by Dvorak himself in the US military. Other recent testing
> > mentioned by pro-Dvorak people show perhaps a 4-6% increase in
> > performance over QWERTY at best.

Post a reply to this message