Re: [Scheme-reports] r7rs-draft-6: identifiers looking as numbers
Peter Bex
(10 May 2012 08:11 UTC)
|
[Scheme-reports] Date/time package
John Cowan
(10 May 2012 16:56 UTC)
|
Re: Date/time package
Arthur A. Gleckler
(10 May 2012 17:09 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
Peter Bex
(10 May 2012 18:54 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
John Cowan
(10 May 2012 21:07 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
Peter Bex
(10 May 2012 21:58 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
Alan Watson
(10 May 2012 22:07 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
Noah Lavine
(10 May 2012 22:41 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
John Cowan
(11 May 2012 02:43 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
John Cowan
(11 May 2012 02:16 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
Peter Bex
(11 May 2012 10:05 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
Peter Bex
(11 May 2012 10:13 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
John Cowan
(11 May 2012 14:35 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
John J Foerch
(10 May 2012 23:40 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
John Cowan
(11 May 2012 03:01 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package John J Foerch (11 May 2012 04:37 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
John Cowan
(11 May 2012 04:44 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
John J Foerch
(11 May 2012 05:25 UTC)
|
Re: [Scheme-reports] Date/time package
Daniel Villeneuve
(11 May 2012 03:35 UTC)
|
John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org> writes: > John J Foerch scripsit: > >> Question: what do you mean by the terms "julian" and "gregorian"? > > Those plus the ISO and TAI chronologies are all proleptic, and I have > added language to that effect. > >> Astronomical year numbering: includes a year zero. Used in >> astronomy. > > The ISO chronology has astronomical years, a Monday week-start, and > numbers its centuries in Italian style (century 15 is 1500-1599). > >> As a general-purpose library, it would be nice for the user to be able >> to specify all of these things, depending on the application. (I have >> genealogy and astronomy applications in mind.) > > As I noted, there is no portable way to specify a new base chronology. I had in mind that these options would be provided via optional chronologies, not as the base chronology. >> There is also the can of worms of when the gregorian reform was >> adopted in different countries. If a person wants to work with >> historical dates, it would be important to be able to express these >> differences as different chronologies. > > Hence make-compound-chronology. Cool. >> On a related topic, formatting, there was some discussion in this >> thread about how the ISO8601 is closely tied to its particular >> chronology. > > Well, at least to Western-style chronologies. Yes, that is all I had in mind. 8601 format is more generally useful to western chronologies, beyond its official one. -- John Foerch _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports