Bad version number based on date advice in policy?

[Peter S Galbraith <p.galbraith@globetrotter.net>]

:    3.2.1. Version numbers based on dates
:
:     In general, Debian packages should use the same version numbers as the
:     upstream sources.
:
:     However, in some cases where the upstream version number is based on a
:     date (e.g., a development "snapshot" release) the package management
:     system cannot handle these version numbers without epochs.  For
:     example, dpkg will consider "96May01" to be greater than "96Dec24".
:
:     To prevent having to use epochs for every new upstream version, the
:     version number should be changed to the following format in such
:     cases: "19960501", "19961224".  It is up to the maintainer whether
:     he/she wants to bother the upstream maintainer to change the version
:     numbers upstream, too.
:
:     Note that other version formats based on dates which are parsed
:     correctly by the package management system should _not_ be changed.
:
:     Native Debian packages (i.e., packages which have been written
:     especially for Debian) whose version numbers include dates should
:     always use the "YYYYMMDD" format.

I would suggest using 0.YYYYMMDD to avoid using epoch when upstream
finally decides to use version 1.0 instead.

Peter