OT: 10.4 or 10.04

[ms]

On 06/09/10 23:05, Gurus Knugum wrote:
>
>> The confusion arises because they use a dot to separate year and month,
>> creating the misconception that they are "classical" release numbers.
>> They should write it down 10/4, 10/10, 11/4 , that is, like *dates*,
>> because that's what they are.
>>
>>
> In that case they should follow the ISO-6801 date format, that is
> YYYY-MM-DD (or in this case only YYYY-DD or YY-DD), which in these cases
> will be 10-04, 10-10 and 11-04. But 2010-04 is more obvious and easier to
> understand.

Well, no need of being to enforce an ISO format necessarily for such a 
trivial matter :) , but yes, anything would be better than the dot 
separator. 2010-04 seems to me the best thing (and could be written 
2010-4 without being misleading).