Family Historian User Group

Continued from the Does not display date in ABBREV3 format (22010) thread...

Mark1834 wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2023 10:15

IMO, that is a significant shortcoming, as it is the only numeric date format that is globally unambiguous.

Sorry to disagree Mark, but any date using numbers only has the potential to be ambiguous.

A date wriiten as 1945-06-08 is ambiguous! Did the writer mean 8th June or 6th August?. Was he using your unambigouos format? Just looking at they date one cannot tell!

The only way to get rid of ambiguity is to use month names rather than numbers.

This is particularly true with old ‘Julian’ calendars, where years began with March as month 1. If the parish register used month numbers rathan names, it is easy to get caught out. So a baptism taking place on 1st day of Month 12, actually took place on 1st February (the following year)

Gowermick wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2023 11:54

Mark1834 wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2023 10:15

IMO, that is a significant shortcoming, as it is the only numeric date format that is globally unambiguous.

Sorry to disagree Mark, but any date using numbers only has the potential to be ambiguous.

A date wriiten as 1945-06-08 is ambiguous! Did the writer mean 8th June or 6th August?. Was he using your unambigouos format? Just looking at they date one cannot tell!

The method Mark has suggested is the ISO (International Standards Organisation) for writing dates, because any date that uses this format can only ever mean one thing as it is always written as YYYY-MM-DD. The other added advantage is that it ensures dates can always be sorted easily into ascending and descending order. This is the best method for writing unambiguous dates, but of course people need to know that that is the format being used.

The only way to get rid of ambiguity is to use month names rather than numbers.

This is particularly true with old ‘Julian’ calendars, where years began with March as month 1. If the parish register used month numbers rathan names, it is easy to get caught out. So a baptism taking place on 1st day of Month 12, actually took place on 1st February (the following year)

Month names don't work as a universal concept as they will be different depending on languages. From a programming view point, they are not useful as they can't be sorted (January is after February in the alphabet). Also there isn't a universally agreed way to write them: 5 March 22, 5th March 22, March 5th 2022, etc. etc. Does "March 22" mean "22nd March" or "March 2022"? The ISO Date format can only be written in one way and therefore by its very definition is unambiguous.

FH doesn't help the situation, as it actually uses yyyy-m-d rather than the yyyy-mm-dd set in the preferences. They are different and distinct formats. It's a relatively minor bug, but it can have a significant effect on sorting.

Nick,
One can’t be sure if a date was written using the standard, that was my point.
If you write a book/article and explain that all dates within are written to that standard, then fair enough, but otherwise I stand by what I said, any date written using number is inherently ambiguous.

Even your examples showing how to write 5th March highlights my point. No matter what format was used, the reader would know it referred to the 5th day of the March, and not the 3rd day of May.

BTW, if we polled FHUG members, how many would know there was such an ISO standard? - a little bit niche for most I would suggest

Gowermick wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2023 12:51

Nick,
One can’t be sure if a date was written using the standard, that was my point.
If you write a book/article and explain that all dates within are written to that standard, then fair enough, but otherwise I stand by what I said, any date written using number is inherently ambiguous.

Even your examples showing how to write 5th March highlights my point. No matter what format was used, the reader would know it referred to the 5th day of the March, and not the 3rd day of May.

BTW, if we polled FHUG members, how many would know there was such an ISO standard? - a little bit niche for most I would suggest

Only people who understand English would know what 5th March means.

I doubt many people would know there was an ISO standard and that's not something I'd ever claim. I was just explaining why it is indeed unambiguous. Those people who have to use dates in an international, unambiguous way, such as programmers, use it for that reason.

This topic has been discussed in depth before in Including update date in reports (18777) and Abbreviated month name (19707) with FH expression solutions and Calico Pie's reply to requesting a proper ISO format.

tatewise wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2023 13:14

This topic has been discussed in depth before in Including update date in reports (18777) and Abbreviated month name (19707) with FH expression solutions and Calico Pie's reply to requesting a proper ISO format.

but I don't think the discussion pointed out that FH7 uses the ISO date format when naming Backup files - so why can't it do it for FH7 dates?