Re: Intent to package: "birthday"

[Javier Fdz-Sanguino Pen~a <jfs@ieeesb.etsit.upm.es>]

On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 07:13:26PM -0500, Jonathan P Tomer wrote:
>
> well if you want to look at it from the pov of jesus' birth, it's not
> a year off -- it's at least four years off, according to conventional
> historical wisdom. so the millenium defined as jesus' 1000th year is
> calendar year 1996. however most of the world doesn't care about that,
> nor do we consider new year's day to be 1/12 just because eleven days
> were eliminated in 1752. we use the calendar as it is, not as some
> people think should be.
> 
> --p.

	Yes I know, but I'm not trying to be historically accurate, only
calendar-wise.

	Best regards

	Javi