Re: bit notation in ISO-8859-x is wrong

From: Werner LEMBERG (wl@gnu.org)
Date: Tue Oct 12 2004 - 15:26:16 CST

Next message: D. Starner: "Re: UTF-8 stress test file?"

Previous message: Rick McGowan: "Public Review Issues Update (correction)"
In reply to: Peter Kirk: "Re: bit notation in ISO-8859-x is wrong"
Next in thread: Mike Ayers: "RE: bit notation in ISO-8859-x is wrong"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

> But for certain purposes e.g. historical astronomical calculations
> (used for establishing chronology from records of eclipses etc) the
> year numbers used are effectively negative numbers (and zero) AD.

Well, astronomers normally convert everything to Julian Day (JD)
numbers, starting at January 1st, -4712 (this is -4713 BC), 12h.
Today we have JD 2453291.

Werner

Next message: D. Starner: "Re: UTF-8 stress test file?"
Previous message: Rick McGowan: "Public Review Issues Update (correction)"
In reply to: Peter Kirk: "Re: bit notation in ISO-8859-x is wrong"
Next in thread: Mike Ayers: "RE: bit notation in ISO-8859-x is wrong"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 12 2004 - 15:27:35 CST