RE: CLDR: 2 vs. 4 digit years in US?

From: Rick Cameron (
Date: Tue Dec 06 2005 - 18:33:34 CST

  • Next message: Rick Cameron: "RE: CLDR: 2 vs. 4 digit years in US?"

    Is the CLDR meant to be descriptive or prescriptive?

    If the former, I would say that 06/12/05 is far more common in North
    America than 06/12/2005.


    - rick

    -----Original Message-----
    From: [] On
    Behalf Of Michael Everson
    Sent: Tuesday, 6 December 2005 15:41
    To: Unicode Mailing List
    Subject: Re: CLDR: 2 vs. 4 digit years in US?

    At 15:12 -0800 2005-12-06, Deborah Goldsmith wrote:

    >The issue has been raised as to whether to change the number of digits
    >in the year for short date formats from 2 to 4 for the en_US locale. In

    >other words, should short dates, which are currently formatted like
    >12/06/05, be changed to 12/06/2005?

    In Ireland we prefer 4 digits; we use 06/12/2005. I believe that UK does
    the same, or will do. Bank of Ireland login software asks for this
    format, for instance. It's general.

    12/06/05 or 06/12/05 is just too ambiguous. Most users don't care. So
    use 4 digits.

    Michael Everson *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 06 2005 - 18:35:11 CST