[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#240901: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#240901: (no subject))

reopen 240901

On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 02:23:13AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I was not referring to the bugreport, but this specific message, in
> > particular:
> >   Not filling in the am/pm strings is a mean to say that the
> >   people in the country the locale is fow are not to backward
> >   as to use the am/pm format anymore.  This definitely is the
> >   case for the UK.
> Judging by the writing the author of that text isn't a native speaker of
> English, so I'm not sure where this information comes from. While the
> AM/PM format is inferior to the 24-hour format in many ways, it is most
> certainly false to claim that people in the UK do not use the AM/PM
> format. AM/PM is still significantly more common than 24-hour in UK
> everyday speech, signs, written communication, and so on, and I think
> the onus ought to be on the author of the above to back up his extremely
> surprising statement with facts.
> To take an example, Hansard, the official records of parliamentary
> debates in the House of Commons, records times in the AM/PM format:
>   http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/cm040329/debtext/40329-06.htm#40329-06_time0

Ok, reopening this bugreport then.
But note that one has now to convince upstream or Debian glibc maintainers.


Reply to: