Ultimately there will be a limit to how far I can push these extensions. The group has been receptive so far but I fear we may be approaching the deep-end. I do not think the recent suggestions will go over well, for example ‘1960s’ to mean “the nineteen sixties”.
So let’s try this.
Drop the S for significant digits and repurpose it. So,
[1920..1950] already means “a year between 1920 and 1950”
[1920..1950]S1930 could mean “a year between 1920 and 1950 estimated to be 1930” (S for ‘stimated).
This form can be used to represent significant digits.
171010000S3 (3 significant digits) was meant to mean “Some year between 171000000 and 171999999, estimated to be 171010000”
And could instead be
For “a year in the sixties” what’s wrong with [1960..1969] and for the nineteen hundreds [1900..1999].
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Edward C.
> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 11:34 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [DATETIME] 1/27 conference call notes
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 09:29:12 +0100, [UTF-8?]SaaÅ¡ha Metsärantala wrote
> > > I have another suggestion: the posfix "s". [...] When I speak of the
> 1990s, for example, I mean what you now call 199.. Why not call it that!
> [...] One could extend it too to other units such as century etc.. It is
> kind of like a reversed decimal point.. 0s means decade... Can dicuss all
> the other combinations..
> > That seems good, too! But, I still wonder what the first decade of the
> 1900s would be denoted.
> > Regards!
> > [UTF-8?]SaaÅ¡ha,
> Another take...
> Let me see if I can define a more consistent approach:
> 1980s := the decade of the 1980s
> 1900s := the decade of the 1900s, e.g. 1900-1910
> 100s := the decade of the 100s, e.g. 100-110
> 0s := decade starting at 0.
> The s meaning "decade" and the 0 meaning starting at 0.
> So 1980s is the 198th decade
> Then we can get semantics for things like 1985s. to be something like
> a year measured 1985 with a precision of 10 years. Really a decade shifted
> 5 years.
> If we define
> sNN where NN is years precision.
> s := s10. The default is 10 years precision
> This gives us something like
> 1980s10 would be the same as 1980s
> 1985s2 as a date around 1985 with a precision of 2 years
> 1985s1 is the same as 1985
> Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB