<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_UNCONFIRMED " title="UNCONFIRMED - Use proleptic Gregorian consistently for *all* date formatting and recognition" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=144699#c6">Comment # 6</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_UNCONFIRMED " title="UNCONFIRMED - Use proleptic Gregorian consistently for *all* date formatting and recognition" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=144699">bug 144699</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:mikekaganski@hotmail.com" title="Mike Kaganski <mikekaganski@hotmail.com>"> Mike Kaganski</a> <pre>(In reply to Regina Henschel from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=144699#c5">comment #5</a>) Thanks Regina! Yet, Wikipedia is obviously also misleading. It's a pity how such a fundamental international standard is not available to public, other than in previews like <a href="https://webstore.ansi.org/preview-pages/ISO/preview_ISO+8601-2004.pdf">https://webstore.ansi.org/preview-pages/ISO/preview_ISO+8601-2004.pdf</a>. Section 4.3 in ISO 8601:2004 is "Date and time of day"; 4.3.2 is "Complete representations"; and there's no "4.3.2.1" there. And the section just discusses the representations like "YYYYMMDDThhmmss", "YYYY-Www-DThh:mm±hh" etc. with examples, and discusses the parts and their order for different types of dates like "calendar dates" and "week dates". No mention of Gregorian or Julian calendars there. (I can't share a link to a copy of the standard that I found with DuckDuckGo, somewhere at "<a href="http://dotat.at/">http://dotat.at/</a>"). Possibly the reference is valid in some different edition than 2004.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>