I while back (last fall?) I wrote some of our customers and asked them if
they had a position as to whether the century ends Dec. 31, 1999, or Dec.
31, 2000.  The vast majority have apparently decided that they are
treating Dec.  31, 1999 as the end of the century, despite the positions
of the Library of Congress, NIST, and RGO that the century ends Dec. 31,
2000.  I guess we will follow our customers lead.  It really doesn't
matter to our software, as there is no "century" variable.

It seems the astronomers are the one who are most affected by the screwed
up calendar, and I can only hope for their sake that the calendar system
is revised to make their life easier (a zero year between 1 BC and 1 AD
so that 1 BC, 5 BC, 9 BC, etc. are no-longer leap years and 0, 4 BC, 8
BC, etc. become leap years).  But even if that error (no year zero) is
corrected, will years 0 through 99 be the first century, years 100
through 199 be the second century, etc., or will it be years 1 through
100 and 101 through 200?

Funny, we routinely fix errors in timekeeping (leap seconds), but the
major errors (no year zero, a non-zero-based [non-modern-math-based]
century) continue and propogate into the future.

> <<FWIW, there's an interesting article regarding calendars in the current
> (July 1997) issue of The Atlantic Monthly magazine. (Which is the first
> date of the new millenium, 1 Jan 2000 or 1 Jan 2001?)>>

John
--------------------------------------------------------------
John Korb                            email: [log in to unmask]
Innovative Software Solutions, Inc.

The thoughts, comments, and opinions expressed herein are mine
and do not reflect those of my employer(s), or anyone else.