Date fails on dd/mm/yyyy

[Loïc Grenié]

On Sun Jan 28th, 2024, at 16:29, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> On Sun, 2024-01-28 at 15:35 +0100, Loïc Grenié wrote:
> >  (yyyy/mm/dd is not that bad: it respect
> >   alphabetical order as well)
>
> Hi,
>
> "alphabetical order" for dates?
>
> You aren't entirely wrong, however we have got "numerical order" and
> "lexicographical ordering" etc. pp. and actually numbers aren't part of
> the alphabet.
>
> "Another example of a non-dictionary use of lexicographical ordering
> appears in the ISO 8601 standard for dates, which expresses a date as
> YYYY-MM-DD. This formatting scheme has the advantage that the
> lexicographical order on sequences of characters that represent dates
> coincides with the chronological order: an earlier CE date is smaller in
> the lexicographical order than a later date up to year 9999. This date
> ordering makes computerized sorting of dates easier by avoiding the need
> for a separate sorting algorithm." -
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicographic_order
>
> You point related to "chronological order" and/or "lexical order" is ok,
> but the term "alphabetical order" is wrong.
>

      Sorry for the wrong term. What you write is what I meant.

          Loïc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20240128/9e8f21cb/attachment-0001.html>