tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 05 Jan 2009 07:04:15
From: Scott
Subject: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09
http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/index.html

Folks, the first slam of 2009 is only 14 days away!

Go Feds!





 
Date: 06 Jan 2009 16:31:08
From:
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09

> >>>> Go Feds!
>
> >>> can't wait!!! Go Roger~~
>
> >> Except it starts on 19/1, not 1/19.
>
> > Do you mean 20090119?
>
> That will do too. At least the order is a progression: largest to smallest
> units. 19/1/09 is also a progression, smallest to largest. What doesn't make
> sense is 1/19/09.

Slow start to the season, eh?


  
Date: 07 Jan 2009 11:43:14
From: DavidW
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> Go Feds!
>>
>>>>> can't wait!!! Go Roger~~
>>
>>>> Except it starts on 19/1, not 1/19.
>>
>>> Do you mean 20090119?
>>
>> That will do too. At least the order is a progression: largest to
>> smallest units. 19/1/09 is also a progression, smallest to largest.
>> What doesn't make sense is 1/19/09.
>
> Slow start to the season, eh?

Yeah. :-)




 
Date: 05 Jan 2009 22:31:33
From: John P
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09
the perfect antidote for Obama inauguration fever (yeah, I voted for him
but enough already). here's hoping ESPN has hours of coverage on
Inauguration Day (Jan. 20th).



 
Date: 05 Jan 2009 16:31:41
From: Giovanna
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09

> Folks, the first slam of 2009 is only 14 days away!
>
> Go Feds!

can't wait!!! Go Roger~~


  
Date: 06 Jan 2009 11:42:27
From: DavidW
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09
Giovanna wrote:
>> Folks, the first slam of 2009 is only 14 days away!
>>
>> Go Feds!
>
> can't wait!!! Go Roger~~

Except it starts on 19/1, not 1/19.




   
Date: 06 Jan 2009 00:23:01
From: pltrgyst
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:42:27 +1100, "DavidW" <no@email.provided > wrote:

>Giovanna wrote:
>>> Folks, the first slam of 2009 is only 14 days away!
>>>
>>> Go Feds!
>>
>> can't wait!!! Go Roger~~
>
>Except it starts on 19/1, not 1/19.

Do you mean 20090119?

-- Larry


    
Date: 07 Jan 2009 07:59:53
From: DavidW
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09
pltrgyst wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:42:27 +1100, "DavidW" <no@email.provided> wrote:
>
>> Giovanna wrote:
>>>> Folks, the first slam of 2009 is only 14 days away!
>>>>
>>>> Go Feds!
>>>
>>> can't wait!!! Go Roger~~
>>
>> Except it starts on 19/1, not 1/19.
>
> Do you mean 20090119?

That will do too. At least the order is a progression: largest to smallest
units. 19/1/09 is also a progression, smallest to largest. What doesn't make
sense is 1/19/09.




     
Date: 07 Jan 2009 01:10:59
From: Javier Gonzalez
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09
DavidW <no@email.provided > wrote:
> pltrgyst wrote:
>> On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:42:27 +1100, "DavidW" <no@email.provided> wrote:
>>
>>> Giovanna wrote:
>>>>> Folks, the first slam of 2009 is only 14 days away!
>>>>>
>>>>> Go Feds!
>>>>
>>>> can't wait!!! Go Roger~~
>>>
>>> Except it starts on 19/1, not 1/19.
>>
>> Do you mean 20090119?
>
> That will do too. At least the order is a progression: largest to smallest
> units. 19/1/09 is also a progression, smallest to largest. What doesn't make
> sense is 1/19/09.

m/d/Y makes sense if you are reading out loud, in english, as in January 7th,
2009. Which is to say, not much sense.

My preference is for YYYYmmdd. Sorts correctly without conversions :)


      
Date: 07 Jan 2009 15:34:11
From: DavidW
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09
Javier Gonzalez wrote:
> DavidW <no@email.provided> wrote:
>> pltrgyst wrote:
>>> On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:42:27 +1100, "DavidW" <no@email.provided>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Giovanna wrote:
>>>>>> Folks, the first slam of 2009 is only 14 days away!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Go Feds!
>>>>>
>>>>> can't wait!!! Go Roger~~
>>>>
>>>> Except it starts on 19/1, not 1/19.
>>>
>>> Do you mean 20090119?
>>
>> That will do too. At least the order is a progression: largest to
>> smallest units. 19/1/09 is also a progression, smallest to largest.
>> What doesn't make sense is 1/19/09.
>
> m/d/Y makes sense if you are reading out loud, in english, as in
> January 7th, 2009. Which is to say, not much sense.
>
> My preference is for YYYYmmdd. Sorts correctly without conversions :)

Yes, I use that in filenames sometimes for sorting reasons.




       
Date: 08 Jan 2009 13:36:24
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Aussie Open: 1/19 - 2/2/09
DavidW wrote:
> Javier Gonzalez wrote:
>> DavidW <no@email.provided> wrote:
>>> pltrgyst wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:42:27 +1100, "DavidW" <no@email.provided>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Giovanna wrote:
>>>>>>> Folks, the first slam of 2009 is only 14 days away!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Go Feds!
>>>>>> can't wait!!! Go Roger~~
>>>>> Except it starts on 19/1, not 1/19.
>>>> Do you mean 20090119?
>>> That will do too. At least the order is a progression: largest to
>>> smallest units. 19/1/09 is also a progression, smallest to largest.
>>> What doesn't make sense is 1/19/09.
>> m/d/Y makes sense if you are reading out loud, in english, as in
>> January 7th, 2009. Which is to say, not much sense.
>>
>> My preference is for YYYYmmdd. Sorts correctly without conversions :)
>
> Yes, I use that in filenames sometimes for sorting reasons.
>
>

Brains *can* be pretty flexible. :-)

--
Cheers,

vc