Difference between revisions of "Talk:News and Projects"
From CPCWiki - THE Amstrad CPC encyclopedia!
m |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
We really should use YYYY-MM-DD format dates rather than confusing users with what might be DD-MM-YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY -- David Cantrell, 2006-09-15 | We really should use YYYY-MM-DD format dates rather than confusing users with what might be DD-MM-YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY -- David Cantrell, 2006-09-15 | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Wow, David, so glad to see you here... By the way, I'm the one your old 464 with the 6128 ROMS went to... Could never thank you enough. Please do register! | ||
| + | :Anyhow, I'm not sure I'm getting the distinction - it's a very fine one, between YYYY-MM-DD and DD-MM-YYYY, or am I missing something? I'd instictively go for YYYY-MM-DD because it's great for filename archiving etc, but I'm not sure about such practicality here? [[User:Gryzor|Gryzor]] 16:22, 16 September 2006 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 09:22, 16 September 2006
Please have a look at WikiNews, how news are managed. I tried to do it here in the same way. Would be cool, if we could do it in this way every time in the future. -- Prodatron 01:57, 28 August 2006 (CEST)
We really should use YYYY-MM-DD format dates rather than confusing users with what might be DD-MM-YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY -- David Cantrell, 2006-09-15
- Wow, David, so glad to see you here... By the way, I'm the one your old 464 with the 6128 ROMS went to... Could never thank you enough. Please do register!
- Anyhow, I'm not sure I'm getting the distinction - it's a very fine one, between YYYY-MM-DD and DD-MM-YYYY, or am I missing something? I'd instictively go for YYYY-MM-DD because it's great for filename archiving etc, but I'm not sure about such practicality here? Gryzor 16:22, 16 September 2006 (CEST)
