Honda Car Forum

Afternoon!

Sorry this is off-topic, but I read and post here fairly
regularly, and I thought there were bound to be some
other folk like me who look out for particular odometer
readings (e.g. 654321, 111111, 123456 etc.)

Earlier today, my car was showing this reading:
http://www.bat400.com/images/odo1.gif (gif/53k)

Can you see why it's significant?
If not then this clue might help:
http://www.bat400.com/images/odo2.gif (gif/79k)

Extra points if you can also tell me what model and year
the honda is (it's UK but it has a US equivalent)...

Al Reynolds

> regularly, and I thought there were bound to be some
> other folk like me who look out for particular odometer
> readings (e.g. 654321, 111111, 123456 etc.)
>
> Earlier today, my car was showing this reading:
> http://www.bat400.com/images/odo1.gif (gif/53k)
>
> Can you see why it's significant?
> If not then this clue might help:
> http://www.bat400.com/images/odo2.gif (gif/79k)

Interesting, but I don't know what this has to do with anything.

in the states we write our dates as month/day/year, where the photo has
day/month/year, the same as the date on the paper.





"Im anonymous" <acctforjunk@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bffabe31.0408111422.8a34f79@posting.google.co m...
> > regularly, and I thought there were bound to be some
> > other folk like me who look out for particular odometer
> > readings (e.g. 654321, 111111, 123456 etc.)
> >
> > Earlier today, my car was showing this reading:
> > http://www.bat400.com/images/odo1.gif (gif/53k)
> >
> > Can you see why it's significant?
> > If not then this clue might help:
> > http://www.bat400.com/images/odo2.gif (gif/79k)
>
> Interesting, but I don't know what this has to do with anything.

> "Im anonymous" <acctforjunk@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bffabe31.0408111422.8a34f79@posting.google.co m...
> > > regularly, and I thought there were bound to be some
> > > other folk like me who look out for particular odometer
> > > readings (e.g. 654321, 111111, 123456 etc.)
> > >
> > > Earlier today, my car was showing this reading:
> > > http://www.bat400.com/images/odo1.gif (gif/53k)
> > >
> > > Can you see why it's significant?
> > > If not then this clue might help:
> > > http://www.bat400.com/images/odo2.gif (gif/79k)
> >
> > Interesting, but I don't know what this has to do with anything.

"Keith J" <_keith_757@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:fLydnWkJp68NR4fcRVn-qg@comcast.com...
> in the states we write our dates as month/day/year, where the photo has
> day/month/year, the same as the date on the paper.

Good point! I had forgotten that yesterday would
be 08/11/04 in the states rather than 11/08/04.

Al

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:48:49 -0400, "Keith J" <_keith_757@comcast.net>
wrote:

>in the states we write our dates as month/day/year, where the photo has
>day/month/year, the same as the date on the paper.

Almost the entire world writes dates dd/mm/yyyy, which is, in fact,
more logical than mm/dd/yyyy.
I think we should be less ethnocentric and join them. Interestingly,
but still WAY off topic, some segments of the US military have
recently adopted the format, yyyymmdd with no separators. Today is
20040813 in the USAF.

>"Im anonymous" <acctforjunk@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:bffabe31.0408111422.8a34f79@posting.google.c om...
>> > regularly, and I thought there were bound to be some
>> > other folk like me who look out for particular odometer
>> > readings (e.g. 654321, 111111, 123456 etc.)
>> >
>> > Earlier today, my car was showing this reading:
>> > http://www.bat400.com/images/odo1.gif (gif/53k)
>> >
>> > Can you see why it's significant?
>> > If not then this clue might help:
>> > http://www.bat400.com/images/odo2.gif (gif/79k)
>>
>> Interesting, but I don't know what this has to do with anything.
>

Ron

Milleron wrote:
> some segments of the US military have
> recently adopted the format, yyyymmdd with no separators. Today is
> 20040813 in the USAF.

Not sure how recent this is, Milleron. I'm not in the military, but have
been using and recommending this format for years to properly sort files
in chronological order. I know I wasn't the first. ;-)

Abe

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:02:04 -0400, Abeness <news@nada.x> wrote:

>Milleron wrote:
>> some segments of the US military have
>> recently adopted the format, yyyymmdd with no separators. Today is
>> 20040813 in the USAF.
>
>Not sure how recent this is, Milleron. I'm not in the military, but have
>been using and recommending this format for years to properly sort files
>in chronological order. I know I wasn't the first. ;-)
>
>Abe

The Air Force made this switch only this year. It's still not used to
the exclusion of other formats in every setting, but many official
forms, especially ones that are filled in with computer software,
require it. It might be in effect throughout the Dept. of Defense for
all I know.
Ron

Milleron wrote:
> The Air Force made this switch only this year. It's still not used to
> the exclusion of other formats in every setting, but many official
> forms, especially ones that are filled in with computer software,
> require it.

Interesting. About time, I'd think.

Milleron wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:48:49 -0400, "Keith J" <_keith_757@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>in the states we write our dates as month/day/year, where the photo has
>>day/month/year, the same as the date on the paper.
>
>
> Almost the entire world writes dates dd/mm/yyyy, which is, in fact,
> more logical than mm/dd/yyyy.

Who besides the Europeans?

> I think we should be less ethnocentric and join them.

I don't agree - if Y2K taught us anything, it's that both days or months
first are not a good idea.

> Interestingly,
> but still WAY off topic, some segments of the US military have
> recently adopted the format, yyyymmdd with no separators. Today is
> 20040813 in the USAF.

QED

Years ago some people at IBM were trying to adopt the dd MON yyyy
format, e.g., 14 AUG 2004, to eliminate any doubt about the date format.
IIRC the military used that format for a while. It's great for visual
differentiation.

Abeness wrote:

> Milleron wrote:
>
>> The Air Force made this switch only this year. It's still not used to
>> the exclusion of other formats in every setting, but many official
>> forms, especially ones that are filled in with computer software,
>> require it.
>
> Interesting. About time, I'd think.

Agreed, but it's hardly new:

International Standard ISO 8601 specifies numeric representations of
date and time. This standard notation helps to avoid confusion in
international communication caused by the many different national
notations and increases the portability of computer user interfaces. In
addition, these formats have several important advantages for computer
usage compared to other traditional date and time notations. The time
notation described here is already the de-facto standard in almost all
countries and the date notation is becoming increasingly popular.

Especially authors of Web pages and software engineers who design user
interfaces, file formats, and communication protocols should be familiar
with ISO 8601.

Contents: Date, Time of Day, Time Zone.

Date

The international standard date notation is

YYYY-MM-DD

where YYYY is the year in the usual Gregorian calendar, MM is the month
of the year between 01 (January) and 12 (December), and DD is the day of
the month between 01 and 31.

For example, the fourth day of February in the year 1995 is written in
the standard notation as

1995-02-04

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-time.html#date