From: André Szabolcs Szelp (a.sz.szelp@gmx.net)
Date: Sun Oct 30 2005 - 15:14:43 CST
> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:33:54 -0800
> From: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
> Subject: Re: Roman Numerals (was Re: Improper grounds for
> rejection of proposal
>
> > On 2005-10-28 09:43, John H. Jenkins wrote:
> >
> >> 1) The dedicated Roman numerals only go up to twelve,
> > Perhaps for clock faces?
> I always thought it was more likely that they were used for months. ...
Which might be a good guess, as several locales would need roman
numbers for traditional month numbering (as in Hungarian, Russian, two
I can recall immediately). Most implementations of localisations don't
care about this, and usually switch to arab numbers. (Probably because
of the deficincy of the DateFormatStr used by C libraries and their
legacies.
Afaik there is no standard implementation that can produce roman month
numbers.
(The traditional way of writing today would be 2005.X.30. in Hungarian,
localised computer systems retain the order and the period, but not the
roman number: 2005.10.30. (or use the abbreviated month name form:
2005.okt.30. ))
/Sz
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Oct 30 2005 - 15:15:25 CST