The Linux Foundation

 
Talk:Main Page

From The Linux Foundation

(Difference between revisions)
m (date: add sources)
m (date: add sources)
Line 13: Line 13:
 
  22 January 2007
 
  22 January 2007
 
  14:33, 22 January 2007 -- [history in the mediawiki interface]
 
  14:33, 22 January 2007 -- [history in the mediawiki interface]
 +
06:32, 22 January 2007 (PST) -- [mediawiki created timestamp in signatures]
 
  11/06/06 (what is that???)
 
  11/06/06 (what is that???)
 
  2006, November 4
 
  2006, November 4

Revision as of 12:37, 1 February 2007

the "linux msdn"

if this meets goals & expectations, linux just won a major massive battle (imho)

date

IMO it would be better to use one and only one standardized date format on this website. A good candidate would be the ISO 8601 date specification. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 21:46, 21 January 2007 (PST)

some examples of the mix here, none ISO compliant:

linux-foundation.org
25-Apr-2006 -- [1]
January 21st, 2007
January 21, 2007
22 January 2007
14:33, 22 January 2007 -- [history in the mediawiki interface]
06:32, 22 January 2007 (PST) -- [mediawiki created timestamp in signatures]
11/06/06 (what is that???)
2006, November 4
linux-foundation.jp
2007-1-22

Tobias Conradi (Talk) 06:32, 22 January 2007 (PST)

Tobias, I'm a huge fan of ISO 8601 dates. However, the most important thing is that they be unambiguous, and January 21, 2007 is unambiguous. Could you please add page names that show 11/06/06 style dates. You can also edit these yourself, it's it not a top-level page. Thanks.

- Dan Kohn

I will look whether I find them and add the sources above. I cannot edit for example the page Specifications. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:33, 1 February 2007 (PST)


[Article] [Discussion] [View source] [History]