Re: mutt/1296: iso date/time format by default
On Wednesday, September 28, 2005 at 17:21:45 +0200, Vincent Lefèvre wrote:
> Instead of containing the month in letters (possible abbreviated), the
> default date format should contain the corresponding number, as in
> "2005-09-28".
It's very much nicer with month name. Even nicer unabbreviated.
> I don't find [ISO-8601 attrib] ugly.
But some people do: No consensus. I can be mistaken, but I predict
there never will be consensus for 8601. Neither in $index_format nor
$date_format. Glenn has made some good points at the 1296 discussion
beginning 3 years ago. Especially quoting ISO itself:
| It is not intended as a replacement for language-dependent worded date
| notations such as "24. Dezember 2001" (German) or "February 4, 1995"
| (US English).
> I don't think that there exists a format adapted to anyone, in
> particular for the 24-hour format vs the am/pm format.
Yes. And I think that a default well adapted to one population (even
if I am not inside) can be a model for other localizations, and is
better than an ISO mildly bad for everybody.
> Why English? Is English the laguage that is the most spoken?
In international mailing lists, probably yes. But I'd say more
because English is already Mutt's default anyway. Start a full default
Mutt on a full default system: It talks English.
Bye! Alain.
--
« if you believe the Content-Language header, I've got a bridge to sell you. »