Re: 2013 21 Aug

[Nick from England]

"odraudeo@ hotmail.com" <odra...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:31f7d317-dda1-4d52...@d4g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...
> Пзэс

I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
old-fashioned" :-D

--
NfE

[Peter Brooks]

On Jan 2, 12:25 pm, "Nick from England" <pacif...@btopenworld.com>
wrote:
> "odraudeo@ hotmail.com" <odrau...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:31f7d317-dda1-4d52...@d4g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Ïçýñ

>
> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
> old-fashioned" :-D
>

I thought people did it because they didn't know any better, not
because they thought it was modern!

When I turn on the radio occasionally, I hear advertisements saying
that something is going to happen on 'twenty January' - I think they
find it difficult to get actors who can pronounce the 'th', so they
just give up and leave it out. Actors who can speak properly are, no
doubt, much more expensive, so you can understand them going for the
cheaper option.

[Cheryl]

On 02/01/2013 7:13 AM, Peter Brooks wrote:
> On Jan 2, 12:25 pm, "Nick from England" <pacif...@btopenworld.com>
> wrote:
>> "odraudeo@ hotmail.com" <odrau...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:31f7d317-dda1-4d52...@d4g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...
>>

>>> Пзэс

>>
>> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
>> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
>> old-fashioned" :-D
>>
> I thought people did it because they didn't know any better, not
> because they thought it was modern!
>
> When I turn on the radio occasionally, I hear advertisements saying
> that something is going to happen on 'twenty January' - I think they
> find it difficult to get actors who can pronounce the 'th', so they
> just give up and leave it out. Actors who can speak properly are, no
> doubt, much more expensive, so you can understand them going for the
> cheaper option.
>

I like the form 2013-01-01 because in Canada I sometimes see the US
version and sometimes the UK one and get confused.

So I confuse everyone who is unfamiliar with the version I prefer instead.

--
Cheryl

[Guy Barry]

[I am astonished to see "ed.followup" in the newsgroups line. This is a
local Edinburgh group and was redundant when I was there twenty years ago!]

"Cheryl" wrote in message news:akin5g...@mid.individual.net...

>I like the form 2013-01-01 because in Canada I sometimes see the US version
>and sometimes the UK one and get confused.

Not on that particular date though! I believe that part of the reason it
was adopted as the ISO standard was to avoid US/UK date confusion, but it
doesn't seem to have caught on.

--
Guy Barry

[Peter Brooks]

On Jan 2, 2:23 pm, Cheryl <cperk...@mun.ca> wrote:
> On 02/01/2013 7:13 AM, Peter Brooks wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 2, 12:25 pm, "Nick from England" <pacif...@btopenworld.com>
> > wrote:
> >> "odraudeo@ hotmail.com" <odrau...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:31f7d317-dda1-4d52...@d4g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...
>

> >>> Ïçýñ

>
> >> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
> >> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
> >> old-fashioned" :-D
>
> > I thought people did it because they didn't know any better, not
> > because they thought it was modern!
>
> > When I turn on the radio occasionally, I hear advertisements saying
> > that something is going to happen on 'twenty January' - I think they
> > find it difficult to get actors who can pronounce the 'th', so they
> > just give up and leave it out. Actors who can speak properly are, no
> > doubt, much more expensive, so you can understand them going for the
> > cheaper option.
>
> I like the form 2013-01-01 because in Canada I sometimes see the US
> version and sometimes the UK one and get confused.
>
> So I confuse everyone who is unfamiliar with the version I prefer instead.
>

I wasn't really referring to the order, but to the use of 1st, 2nd and
so forth.

I agree that going DD-MM-YYYY is as sensible as going YYYY-MM-DD,
depending, a little, on what the information is - with most quotidian
stuff having the day first makes sense because that's what's most
important, while with a list of historical dates having the year first
might make more sense.

What makes no sense to me at all is having the day in the middle. One
can, I know, in English, say 'June the 21st last year', or 'in 1842'
because you're particularly marking the month, but that's the one
exception - even then, it usually makes more sense to say the '21st of
June last year'.

[Anton Shepelev]

Peter Brooks:

> I agree that going DD-MM-YYYY is as sensible as
> going YYYY-MM-DD, depending, a little, on what the

> information is -- with most quotidian stuff having

> the day first makes sense because that's what's
> most important, while with a list of historical
> dates having the year first might make more sense.

There's one reason to prefer the second version over
the first: it makes lexicographical ordering of the
date thus recorded correspond with chronological,
which is so much easier to handle by both computers
and people.

--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments

[THE COLONEL]

"odraudeo@ hotmail.com" <odra...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:31f7d317-dda1-4d52...@d4g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...
> Пзэс


Cross circuit to panel B.

--
I have killfiled the assworm. He is my prisoner.

[Steve Hayes]

On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 23:45:35 -0800 (PST), "odraudeo@ hotmail.com"
<odra...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Ïçýñ

Whatever turns you on.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Steve Hayes]

On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 12:47:27 -0000, "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:

It's also much easier for sort in computers, and it's the only form I use to
write numeric dates. It's been standard here for 40 years.

[Robert Bannister]

Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
> On 02/01/2013 7:13 AM, Peter Brooks wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 12:25 pm, "Nick from England" <pacif...@btopenworld.com>
>> wrote:
>>> "odraudeo@ hotmail.com" <odrau...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:31f7d317-dda1-4d52...@d4g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...
>>>

>>>> Ïçýñ

>>>
>>> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
>>> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
>>> old-fashioned" :-D
>>>
>> I thought people did it because they didn't know any better, not
>> because they thought it was modern!
>>
>> When I turn on the radio occasionally, I hear advertisements saying
>> that something is going to happen on 'twenty January' - I think they
>> find it difficult to get actors who can pronounce the 'th', so they
>> just give up and leave it out. Actors who can speak properly are, no
>> doubt, much more expensive, so you can understand them going for the
>> cheaper option.
>>
>
> I like the form 2013-01-01 because in Canada I sometimes see the US
> version and sometimes the UK one and get confused.
>
> So I confuse everyone who is unfamiliar with the version I prefer instead.

Well done. A worthy aim.

--
Rob's iPad

[Don Phillipson]

"Nick from England" <paci...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:kc11ug$sfv$1...@dont-email.me...

> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
> old-fashioned" :-D

Nick's college source was mistaken. The modern (International Standards
Organization) order in which dates should be written runs: Year/Month/Day.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[John Dunlop]

Don Phillipson:

> [Nick from England:]

>
>> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
>> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
>> old-fashioned" :-D

I would read both of them aloud as "the twenty-first of August, two thousand
and thirteen".

> Nick's college source was mistaken. The modern (International Standards
> Organization) order in which dates should be written runs: Year/Month/Day.

There isn't an ISO standard for dates that are spelt out. ISO 8601 confines
itself to dates written numerically.

--
John

[Guy Barry]

"John Dunlop" wrote in message
news:PM0004D26...@john-dunlops-computer.lan...

>
>Don Phillipson:
>
>> [Nick from England:]
>>
>>> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
>>> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
>>> old-fashioned" :-D
>
>I would read both of them aloud as "the twenty-first of August, two
>thousand
>and thirteen".

Ditto, except that I'd say "twenty thirteen".

--
Guy Barry

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2013-01-03 14:45:29 +0100, "Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> said:

> "Nick from England" <paci...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:kc11ug$sfv$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
>> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
>> old-fashioned" :-D
>
> Nick's college source was mistaken. The modern (International Standards
> Organization) order in which dates should be written runs: Year/Month/Day.

Maybe, but although I have the impression that that recommendation is
widely followed in Scandinavia it is largely ignored elsewhere.


--
athel

[Mark Brader]

Don Phillipson:

> > Nick's college source was mistaken. The modern (International Standards
> > Organization)

International Organization for Standardization.

> > order in which dates should be written runs: Year/Month/Day.

With hyphens, not slashes. It's 2012-01-03.

Athel Cornish-Bowden:

> Maybe, but although I have the impression that that recommendation is
> widely followed in Scandinavia it is largely ignored elsewhere.

Living in Canada, I see all possible numeric date formats in actual use
[or at least it seems like it], including that one.
--
Mark Brader | Could it be that this law has nothing to do with law, justice,
Toronto | morality, liberty, or foreign trade, and everything to do with
m...@vex.net | politics? Shame on me for being so cynical. -- Morley Safer

[Robert Bannister]

"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
> "Nick from England" <paci...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:kc11ug$sfv$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
>> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
>> old-fashioned" :-D
>
> Nick's college source was mistaken. The modern (International Standards
> Organization) order in which dates should be written runs: Year/Month/Day.

Surely that depends on the where and when. In the USA, it would still be
preferable to use the curious "day-in-the-middle" system that the rest of
us find so infuriating. I still write "st, nd, rd, th" myself, but I can
understand that it is perceived as old-fashioned in some circles, and I
would agree that "21 Aug 2013" was probably the most common form outside
America. Note: this has nothing to do with the "correct" form. Perhaps the
most common form of all is the European "21. Aug 2013".

--
Rob's iPad

[Tony Cooper]

On 3 Jan 2013 22:34:09 GMT, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com>
wrote:

>"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>> "Nick from England" <paci...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
>> news:kc11ug$sfv$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
>>> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
>>> old-fashioned" :-D
>>
>> Nick's college source was mistaken. The modern (International Standards
>> Organization) order in which dates should be written runs: Year/Month/Day.
>
>Surely that depends on the where and when. In the USA, it would still be
>preferable to use the curious "day-in-the-middle" system that the rest of
>us find so infuriating.

Depends. I write "January 3, 2013", but use "2013-01-03" when I don't
spell out the month name. All my photos have that style date-name.





--
Tony Cooper, Orlando FL

[David Hatunen]

On computer files I use "20120103"

Dave Hatunen, Tucson
Viva Baja Arizona

[Peter Brooks]

On Jan 4, 3:57 am, David Hatunen <hatu...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 18:21:56 -0500, Tony Cooper
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <tonycooper...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 3 Jan 2013 22:34:09 GMT, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com>
> >wrote:
>

> >>"Don Phillipson" <e...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
> >>> "Nick from England" <pacif...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message

> >>>news:kc11ug$sfv$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> >>>> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
> >>>> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
> >>>> old-fashioned" :-D
>
> >>> Nick's college source was mistaken.   The modern (International Standards
> >>> Organization) order in which dates should be written runs: Year/Month/Day.
>
> >>Surely that depends on the where and when. In the USA, it would still be
> >>preferable to use the curious "day-in-the-middle"  system that the rest of
> >>us find so infuriating.
>
> >Depends.  I write "January 3, 2013", but use "2013-01-03" when I don't
> >spell out the month name.  All my photos have that style date-name.
>
> On computer files I use "20120103"
>

You need to replace your calendar.

[David Hatunen]

Depends on when the file was created.

[Peter Brooks]

No it doesn't. You said 'I use', which is usually, in English,
considered the present tense. Or were you using a dramatic present?

[David Hatunen]

It was just meant as an exemplar. Needless to say, in early January I
tend to use the old year a lot. Fortunately, I did use 2013 on a check
I wrote this morning.

[Peter Brooks]

On Jan 4, 7:17 pm, David Hatunen <hatu...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 18:16:08 -0800 (PST), Peter Brooks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Not quite needless then. We do make the mistake, naturally, early in
the year. My comment was simply meant to be a jocular reminder.

[Glenn Knickerbocker]

Maybe this is why the Julian calendar didn't change years until late March.

ŹR

[Nick from England]

"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in message
news:kc43ft$694$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

> "Nick from England" <paci...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:kc11ug$sfv$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
>> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
>> old-fashioned" :-D
>
> Nick's college source was mistaken.

You wouldn't say that to Alicia! :-D

> The modern (International Standards
> Organization) order in which dates should be written runs: Year/Month/Day.

Can't rely on those chumps!

http://www.usingenglish.com/forum/ask-teacher/67877-typing-date-correct-format.html

"There is no absolute correct or incorrect way.

However, in business, the US way is month/day/year, the UK way is
day/month/year, so writing a formal letter to someone in the US you would
put May 10, 2008; to the UK, 10 May 2008."

--
NfE

[Glenn Knickerbocker]

On 1/4/2013 8:01 PM, Nick from England wrote:
> However, in business, the US way is month/day/year, the UK way is
> day/month/year, so writing a formal letter to someone in the US you would
> put May 10, 2008; to the UK, 10 May 2008."

I've always wondered, how do people normally read that last form aloud?
I think of "ten May" as something I'd only hear from American military
people, and only in a military context.

ŹR

[Steve Hayes]

On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 19:13:35 -0500, Glenn Knickerbocker <No...@bestweb.net>
wrote:

>Maybe this is why the Julian calendar didn't change years until late March.

And a Merry Christmas to those on the old calendar who will be celebrating
Christmas Eve tomorrow.

[Guy Barry]

"Glenn Knickerbocker" wrote in message
news:oIednWjqfoqAHXrN...@bestweb.net...

"The tenth of May" for me (and the first would be "May the tenth"). I would
never say either "ten May" or "May ten", irrespectively of how it's written.

--
Guy Barry

[Nick from England]

"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:27RFs.445017$kX.1...@fx18.am4...

Yep, agree, but Alicia from college would say 'the 10th. May 2008' written
was "*so* old-fashioned", lol!

Although, IIRC, the form 'May ten 2008' (but not that date) was used at the
end of a film about Benedict Arnold and spoken, possibly, by John Dehner - a
colour movie with Michael Wilding playing a Redcoat.

'E's Pope now, Benedict Arnold - succeeded Pope John Paul George & Ringo!
:-D

--
NfE

[Guy Barry]

"Nick from England" wrote in message news:kc8thi$ar6$1...@dont-email.me...

>
>"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:27RFs.445017$kX.1...@fx18.am4...

>> "The tenth of May" for me (and the first would be "May the tenth"). I
>> would never say either "ten May" or "May ten", irrespectively of how it's
>> written.

This is *very* curious. I definitely wrote the above, and I could swear
that I always say "irrespective of"; but clearly my fingers decided that
"irrespective" is an adverb and should take "-ly". Maybe my "inner
prescriptivist" was taking over.

--
Guy Barry

[Nick from England]

"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message

news:2_SFs.983489$yH4.7...@fx03.am4...

"prescriptivist" taking over?
I see your thoughts are pure
As white as the cliffs of Dover
If you pardon the nomenclature.

Ouch! :-D

--
NfE

[Don Phillipson]

"Nick from England" <paci...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message

news:kc8thi$ar6$1...@dont-email.me...

> Yep, agree, but Alicia from college would say 'the 10th. May 2008' written
> was "*so* old-fashioned", lol!

In other words Alicia is an idealist: she believes certain absolute values
(that have no physical presence or argument) ought to govern behavior.
In this case she believes (1) old-fashionedness is real and is easily
recognizable where it happens, and (2) old-fashionedness ought to
be repudiated or resisted wherever it occurs. This is a primary
value or obligation, i.e. overrides claims of rationality, statistical
utility, convenience, etc. (She probably believes advertisers of
commercial entertainment and clothing fashions as well.)

[Don Phillipson]

"Robert Bannister" <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in message
news:1972444654378944755.791...@news.individual.net...

>> Nick's college source was mistaken. The modern (International Standards
>> Organization) order in which dates should be written runs:
>> Year/Month/Day.
>
> Surely that depends on the where and when. In the USA, it would still be
> preferable to use the curious "day-in-the-middle" system that the rest of
> us find so infuriating.

This is why universal (world-wide) uniform standards have been promoted
for 150 years (since 1884, standard time and Longitude 0 for map-making.)
Standardization seeks expressly to extinguish "that depends on the where
and when." We now know that, however sincerely theoreticians agree
something is a Good Idea, good ideas do not by themselves change
habits and practices (cf. for example current US legislation on taxes
and public debt.)

[Skitt]

Steve Hayes wrote:

> Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:

>> Maybe this is why the Julian calendar didn't change years until late March.
>
> And a Merry Christmas to those on the old calendar who will be celebrating
> Christmas Eve tomorrow.

In Latvia, January 6th is Star Day (Zvaigznes Diena), and it marks the
end of the Winterfest (Ziemassvētki) or Christmas period.

--
Skitt (SF Bay Area)
http://come.to/skitt

[R H Draney]

Skitt filted:

>
>Steve Hayes wrote:
>> Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
>
>>> Maybe this is why the Julian calendar didn't change years until late March.
>>
>> And a Merry Christmas to those on the old calendar who will be celebrating
>> Christmas Eve tomorrow.
>
>In Latvia, January 6th is Star Day (Zvaigznes Diena), and it marks the
>end of the Winterfest (Ziemassvētki) or Christmas period.

In parts of Phoenix, it's Three Kings Day, and is celebrated with crown-shaped
cakes called roscas....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Nick from England]

"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in message

news:kc9ei5$jo7$3...@speranza.aioe.org...

Oh I don't know about all that, but Alicia's a very good teacher.
She would say to this tough guy in our group, "Jon! What are you doing in my
lesson?" and she said to me, "Are you afraid of me?", so I told her that I
was, lol.

There were about 10 of us (mostly older, but with a couple of youngsters)
doing a two week business adminstration course and the 3 or 4 teachers, all
ladies, treated us like children, but in a fun way - we were all very sorry
when the course was over!

--
NfE

[Nick from England]

"David Hatunen" <hat...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:pmdce8pn7ch3cfda9...@4ax.com...

Sort of a good plan!

The OP's "����" is Icelandic and Google Translates to "����"!
Hmm...

--
DGP

[Robert Bannister]

On 6/01/13 2:33 AM, Skitt wrote:
> Steve Hayes wrote:
>> Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
>
>>> Maybe this is why the Julian calendar didn't change years until late March.
>>
>> And a Merry Christmas to those on the old calendar who will be celebrating
>> Christmas Eve tomorrow.
>
> In Latvia, January 6th is Star Day (Zvaigznes Diena), and it marks the
> end of the Winterfest (Ziemassvētki) or Christmas period.
>

There were an awful lot of people outside the two Macedonian churches
near me on Monday, the 7th.

--
Robert Bannister

[Steve Hayes]

On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:14:04 +0800, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com>
wrote:

>On 6/01/13 2:33 AM, Skitt wrote:
>> Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
>>
>>>> Maybe this is why the Julian calendar didn't change years until late March.
>>>
>>> And a Merry Christmas to those on the old calendar who will be celebrating
>>> Christmas Eve tomorrow.
>>
>> In Latvia, January 6th is Star Day (Zvaigznes Diena), and it marks the

>> end of the Winterfest (Ziemassv?tki) or Christmas period.

>>
>
>There were an awful lot of people outside the two Macedonian churches
>near me on Monday, the 7th.

Did you wish them a merry or a happy Christmas?

[Robert Bannister]

On 8/01/13 9:25 PM, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:14:04 +0800, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 6/01/13 2:33 AM, Skitt wrote:
>>> Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>> Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Maybe this is why the Julian calendar didn't change years until late March.
>>>>
>>>> And a Merry Christmas to those on the old calendar who will be celebrating
>>>> Christmas Eve tomorrow.
>>>
>>> In Latvia, January 6th is Star Day (Zvaigznes Diena), and it marks the
>>> end of the Winterfest (Ziemassv?tki) or Christmas period.
>>>
>>
>> There were an awful lot of people outside the two Macedonian churches
>> near me on Monday, the 7th.
>
> Did you wish them a merry or a happy Christmas?
>
>

I mumbled something like "Dobar Bozhikot", which is probably wrong and
heretical. At least I know what to say at Easter, although it always
sounds to me as if the person concerned has got an erection.

--
Robert Bannister

[John Varela]

On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 16:10:15 UTC, Athel Cornish-Bowden
<athe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On 2013-01-03 14:45:29 +0100, "Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> said:
>
> > "Nick from England" <paci...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> > news:kc11ug$sfv$1...@dont-email.me...
> >
> >> I used to put 'the 21st. August 2013', but I was told at college last
> >> February I should put '21 Aug 2013' and that the former was "*so*
> >> old-fashioned" :-D
> >
> > Nick's college source was mistaken. The modern (International Standards
> > Organization) order in which dates should be written runs: Year/Month/Day.
>

> Maybe, but although I have the impression that that recommendation is
> widely followed in Scandinavia it is largely ignored elsewhere.

I use that format in labeling my photos, so they will sort
correctly:

20130113 [sequence number] [description]

--
John Varela

[Nick from England]

"John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-EUXfdnSS8kvL@localhost...

Alicia would say, "John?! What are you doing in my lesson?" and if you
explained your photo date labels to her, she'd have bin fine.

But woe betide you if you didn't adopt the form '13 Jan 2013' or the strange
American aberration 'Jan 13 2013' - why not put the smallest bit first or
last like on ya pix? :-D

--
Educative NfE

[Anton Shepelev]

I wonder who or what is re-porsing stuff from the good days of AEU.