I would also assume that we need only represent a year (and even then often only an approximation) and not month and day, or time. Proposal: 1. change the profile so that all years based on ISO 8601 syntax are four digits. 2. Introduce the following syntax. Note that we already use the character E to signal certain "extensions". Use EY to signal that a year follows, and the syntax is EY[year] where [year] may be (a) a plain (or signed) integer, e.g. 100001; or (b) an integer in scientific notation e.g. 17*10^9 Comments please. --Ray From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Simon Grant Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 10:22 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [DATETIME] Expanded years Seems like a good idea to me, too, particularly as beyond the 4-digit range, we are talking about scientific estimates of dates, not dates derived from any kind of written records. Simon On 11 January 2011 15:07, Edward C. Zimmermann <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Yes! (the philosophical justification is analogous to the scientific use case) On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 10:00:44 -0500, Ray Denenberg wrote > From: Edward C. Zimmermann > > Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 7:02 AM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [DATETIME] Expanded years > > > > The best solution would be to use a scientific notation. > > Are you suggesting that we use standard ISO 8601 four-digit notation > for four-digit years, and invent a syntax (perhaps based on > scientific notation) to represent larger years? Just trying to get > clarification on your suggestion, I like the idea. > > --Ray -- Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB Basis Systeme netzwerk, Munich Ges. des buergerl. Rechts http://www.nonmonotonic.net Umsatz-St-ID: DE130492967 -- Simon Grant +44 7710031657 http://www.simongrant.org/home.html