FAULT/FLAW: Appearance/Display of DATES when Records have been made has all of a sudden CHANGED from

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

FAULT/FLAW:

Appearance/Display of "Dates" when Records have been made has all of a sudden "Changed" from "dd MMMM yyyy" to "MMMM dd, yyyy".



( 'Tom', I hope you do not mind the individual/person I used )

I am sorry, to my American relatives and friends; but, this is NOT acceptable.

Please REVERT back to the "Date" Format of "dd MMMM yyyy" ASAP.

'Thank You' in advance.

Brett

LegacyUser

David Newton said: Is it unambiguous? Yes. Does it make grammatical sense? Yes. Does it explain where the ridiculous American numerical date format comes from? Quite possibly.

LegacyUser

Paul said: I had a schoolteacher who was very pedantic when it came to such matters - insisting October 19(th) was grammatically incorrect, as it implied a meaning of it being the 19th October in history! But as a result, I have never used this format, always sticking by Day/Month/Year. However, it is wrong to think of the former as being exclusively American. For as long as I can remember English newspapers have used this format on every page. To confirm, I have papers of two titles alongside me - one headed December 5 2018 and (today's paper) headed December 8 2018.

LegacyUser

David Newton said: Well that teacher was pedantically incorrect. 19th October would imply it being the nineteenth October, not the 19th OF October. However convention is to insert the of into speech to make the distinction clear.

LegacyUser

Juli said: As Paul and David imply, if the month is written out in letters, then the month-day-year format is unambiguous and perfectly acceptable usage wherever English is spoken. It's only when the month is replaced with a number that it becomes an incomprehensible mess.

I still advocate for the style common in 19th-20th century Hungary: 8/XII 2018, i.e. a Roman numeral for the month. This makes the date not only unambiguous regardless of ordering (XII/8 2018 works, too), but also language-independent. Where it breaks down is ambiguous sans-serif fonts, like the one here on GetSat, which make dates like 6/I 2020 hard to parse. (The font on FS is sans-serif but much better, because it puts top and bottom bars on the capital i, so it's recognizable even "out of context".)

LegacyUser

Paul said: Really? I "say" 19th October 2018 as "the 19th of October 2018" and everybody else I know in London does the same! (BTW - I do mean twenty-eighteen and not two thousand and eighteen, as some insist on saying.)

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: Is the format of dates not something that should / could be set in the interface?

Though if the date format for events is set to dd mmm yyyy, it seems somewhat perverse to use a different format for information dates.

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

It has been 10 Months since I raised this post; and, yet, the suggested enhancement has, neither, been acknowledged (ie. under consideration or not); or, been actioned (ie. 'Date' reverted BACK to "dd Mmmm YYYY").

Granted, this is a minor matter in the scheme of things, due to the many 'competing priorities' in "Family Tree" of "FamilySearch"; plus, the other Parts of "Family Tree"; and, very 'limited' resources available to "FamilySearch"; but, this still needs to addressed.

Not everyone appreciates the "American" Date Format of "Mmmm DD, YYYY".

The "International" Date Format of "DD Mmmm YYYY" would be very much appreciated by many throughout the World.

' Thank You' in advance.

Brett

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: What amazes me is that this is yet another example of inconsistency in the way FS uses things. That lack of a style guide for the site shows through when these things crop up, essentially meaning that the particular development team can do whatever they want and then ignore any requests for consistent use of things like links, terminology and this one -- the way dates are presented.

I really don't understand why the Mmmm DD YYYY is used when the standard used by most genealogists is DD Mmm YYYY which is used largely throughout FamilySearch FamilyTree, indexes, and so on.



and

LegacyUser

Brett said: Yep

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

ANOTHER recent (3 Days ago) post questioning the 'Date' Format:

Date format for "latest changes"
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

-----

The 'Date' Format that appeared (eg. on the, "Person/Details" page/screen; and, "ChangeLog" page/screen) BEFORE "December 2018" was that of the "International" 'Date' Format, that being, "dd Mmmm YYYY".

Then, for whatever reason, the 'Date' Format that appeared (eg. on the, "Person/Details" page/screen; and, "ChangeLog" page/screen) AFTER "December 2018" became that of the "American" 'Date' Format, that being, "Mmmm dd, YYYY".

I am sorry; and, I do not care for the technical details of WHY such happened ...

Please JUST "Change" the 'Date' Format BACK to the way that it was/appeared (eg. on the, "Person/Details" page/screen; and, "ChangeLog" page/screen - and, whatever other pages/screens were affected) BEFORE "December 2018" to that of the "International" 'Date' Format, that being, "dd Mmmm YYYY".

"Family Tree" and "FamilySearch" is VERY "International" now, so I thought ...

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: And you expect someone to actually do something about this inconsistency issue?

It is apparent that FamilySearch does not adhere to any kind of style guide when it comes to the site. It continues to be all over the place and some attempts (the modal windows, for instance) are going backward when it comes to usability.

I don't expect any attention to the inconsistent nature of dates and features to be addressed any time soon.

LegacyUser

Brett said: YES

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

Any consideration being given to the 'Date' Format that now appears on the, (1) "Person/Details" page/screen; and, (2) "ChangeLog" page/screen, REVERTING "Back" to the more universally accepted "International" 'Date' Format of "dd Mmmm YYYY"?

'Thank You' in advance.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

James Cobban said: This should be treated as one aspect of internationalization, abbreviated I18N. This is not difficult. Even on my personal web site I support multiple internationalization locales. For example if you access https://www.jamescobban.net/FamilyTre... you will see the dates presented in the default Canadian English format. However if you click on the main menu button at the top left you are offered Français, Deutsch, and Español alternatives and your choice is remembered as you wander through the site.

Ancestry seems to address this by registering the Ancestry trademark in each country and obtaining the country specific domain for that trademark. Every date I see, even in family trees created in the USA, is presented to me in ddmmyyyy form because I am accessing the service from Canada, through the domain name ancestry.ca. Since many American users would misinterpret dates in the ddmmyyyy format the international standard ddmmyyyy should not be forced on them, but should be left as a choice of the user just as should be their preference for the language of communication. This leaves unregistered guests as a problem. Ancestry redirects anyone who accesses their site from a particular country to the country specific domain because the packaging of its services differs from country to country. For example at Ancestry.com the basic package includes US records and international records, including Canadian records, are extra. At ancestry.ca the basic package includes Canadian records and US records are extra. FamilySearch directs everybody to the generic US .org domain making it difficult to achieve this. I notice that familysearch.ca is not currently backed by a site, but if the Canadian division of FHL or the LDS itself registered the trademark at the national level they could acquire it. Unlike Britain where there is .org.uk, there is no Canadian equivalent of .org. The only second level domains defined are for the provinces and both for-profit and not-for-profit organizations share the .ca TLD.

LegacyUser

Brett said: James

All very interesting; but, I would suggest that the Church (ie. in this instance, represented by "FamilySearch") may not entertain your suggestion.

But ...
That said ...

In relation to another matter you raised ...

You state that "... Since many American users would misinterpret dates in the ddmmyyyy format the international standard ddmmyyyy should not be forced on them ..."

The "International" Date Format of "dd Mmmm YYYY", was the previous standard used in "Family Tree" of "FamilySearch", in regard to this post of mine; and, many of use outside of the "United States of America", throughout the rest of the World, would be very much appreciated the REVERSION back to that "International" Date Format of "dd Mmmm YYYY".

Hence; IF, such was the case; THEN, there would be NO confusion by "American" Users/Patrons to misinterpret the date.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: While I think we would both prefer dd mmm yyyy to mmm dd yyyy, we can't claim that the first of those two is an International date format. If the phrase International date format means anything, it refers to the ISO date format - which is ordered year month day. (From a quick glance in Wikipedia, that is described as Big Endian).

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: As an aside, the UK originally worked with mmm dd yyyy - I hadn't really thought about it until I was replacing my GG GP's gravestone. I'd reproduced the original inscription and the lady at the Mason's commented that she could tell it was an old inscription because I'd put the month first. It was only then that I realized that most MIs that I'd collected of relatives, being older, were indeed ordered month first.

LegacyUser

Brett said: 'G'Day' Adrian

I really do not care what the 'politically correct' term is.

Like many who are NOT from the American continent (or, associated territories), I much prefer the "dd Mmmm YYYY" format, rather than the "Mmmm dd, YYYY" format.

In "Family Tree" of "FamilySearch", WHY was the EXISTING "dd Mmmm YYYY" format CHANGED to CURRENT "Mmmm dd, YYYY" format, relatively recently (2018)?

That is what I want to know - WHY!

The Church is World wide, the User/Patron base of "Family Tree" of "FamilySearch" is Work wide, WHY change the 'Date' format to an "American" format!!!???

And, WHY has "FamilySearch" NOT changed it BACK to the "dd Mmmm YYYY" format!!!???

Brett

.

LegacyUser

joe martel said: If there is any place on FS where the date is not displayed in an unambiguous way then please post that here.

This thread is kind of getting old and I've posted this reply on another duplicate thread.

The international ISO standard for dates is YYYY-MM-DD or YYYYMMDD. This is ambiguous to many users so is no longer used by the site display of dates. Many users will confuse this 1980-10-01  between October 01, 1980 and 10 January 1980. All digits takes more cognitive power to interpret as well.

As far as I know the dates displayed today are always unambiguous like October 01, 1980 or 1 October 1980. By spelling out the month it removes the ambiguity between the month and the day of the month. FS should never be displaying the month as numerical digits, always spelled out, possibly abbreviated to 3 letters.

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: I don't have a problem with date formats where the month is spelled out - although for reasons of consistency (to avoid the extra cognitive effort) it ought to be one format throughout and preferably that dictated by the user's locale (though I say that without knowledge of how feasible that is). I do regard the consistency requirement as a "should" not a "must".

I would say, however, that I don't believe that the ISO format is ambiguous - not to anyone who's troubled to read about it - I have *never* seen an all numeric date laid out in the format yyyy-dd-mm. Nonetheless, in a system where some people don't even understand the principle of drop down menus, it makes absolute sense to spell the month out!

LegacyUser

David Newton said: The ISO date format is NOT ambiguous. Ambiguous means that it can mean two or more things. The ISO date format can only ever mean one thing.

Now people not understanding what it is may well likely be an issue. However that is NOT ambiguity. That is ignorance which is a very different thing.

LegacyUser

James Cobban said: I should not have called ddmmyyyy an "international date format" because it is not the subject of an ISO standard. However in almost every country on earth the ISO date format, yyyymmdd is one of, and usually the "preferred" national standard date format. yyyymmdd is primarily for use in machine to machine communications because unlike all other formats it is sortable as well as unambiguous. That format is clearly not often used in verbal communications in any human language. But in almost every country on Earth, with to the best of my knowledge and that of Wikipedia the sole exception of the USA, ddmmyyyy is a national standard date format and mmddyyyy is NOT. In the case of Canada where we have two official languages the normal conversational form in French is "le 12 Mars 2020". As for English in Canada we of course have a problem because while many of our public institutions including government derive from Britain, from a cultural point of view English-speaking Canadians are part of America and that includes how most anglophone Canadians express dates in casual written and verbal communications. In the United Kingdom for generations students have been taught, particularly in private schools and by private tutors, to write dates with the day first, just as they are taught that the verb "to be" is a "copular" verb and therefore its object is in the nominative case and that dangling participles are, as Churchill said "Something up with which I shall not put." Furthermore since most of Britain's economic relations are with continental Europe, Boris notwithstanding, the UK national standard is ddmmyyyy. So in Canada mmddyyy is not an option in our national standard. People tend to take pride in those things, regardless of how unimportant they are, which distinguish them from others. So Canadians take umbrage when as a result of importing something from the USA we are presented with dates in the US format, and products described with American units such as feet rather than metres, pounds rather than kilograms, fluid ounces rather than milliltres, and "British" Thermal Units rather than watts. Hey didn't you guys fight a war to get rid of the British?

LegacyUser

Brett said: All

This post (ie. thread) is NOT 'kind of getting old' ...

This post (ie. thread) is still 'active' ...

There is simply NO "Valid" reason WHY the 'Date' format "Changed" from the "dd Mmmm YYYY" format to the "Mmmm dd, YYYY" format around December 2018 in the first place.

I could be wrong; but, most likely, the "Change" was done by a someoner who was, Designing; Developing; Testing; and, Releasing 'In-Line', WITHOUT any oversight or testing by a User/Patron "Focus" Group.

The RELUCTANCE to REVERT BACK to the 'Date' format of "dd Mmmm YYYY" is disappointing and disheartening.

The reversion back to the 'Date' format of "dd Mmmm YYYY" should not be too difficult; as, it happened 'overnight' (or, possibly, during the day); and, should not really be too taxing, even given, the many competing priorities in "Family Tree" of (and, the Other parts of) "FamilySearch"; and, the very limited resources available to "FamilySearch".

Just, DO IT, sooner rather than later.

'Thank You' in advance.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

This post (ie. thread) is NOT 'kind of getting old' ...

This post (ie. thread) is still 'active' ...

There is simply NO "Valid" reason WHY the 'Date' format "Changed" from the "dd Mmmm YYYY" format to the "Mmmm dd, YYYY" format around December 2018 in the first place.

I could be wrong; but, most likely, the "Change" was done by a someoner who was, Designing; Developing; Testing; and, Releasing 'In-Line', WITHOUT any oversight or testing by a User/Patron "Focus" Group.

The RELUCTANCE to REVERT BACK to the 'Date' format of "dd Mmmm YYYY" is disappointing and disheartening.

The reversion back to the 'Date' format of "dd Mmmm YYYY" should not be too difficult; as, it happened 'overnight' (or, possibly, during the day); and, should not really be too taxing, even given, the many competing priorities in "Family Tree" of (and, the Other parts of) "FamilySearch"; and, the very limited resources available to "FamilySearch".

Just, DO IT, sooner rather than later.

'Thank You' in advance.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

This post (ie. thread) is NOT 'kind of getting old' ...

This post (ie. thread) is still 'active' ...

There is simply NO "Valid" reason WHY the 'Date' format "Changed" from the "dd Mmmm YYYY" format to the "Mmmm dd, YYYY" format around December 2018 in the first place.

I could be wrong; but, most likely, the "Change" was done by a someoner who was, Designing; Developing; Testing; and, Releasing 'In-Line', WITHOUT any oversight or testing by a User/Patron "Focus" Group.

The RELUCTANCE to REVERT BACK to the 'Date' format of "dd Mmmm YYYY" is disappointing and disheartening.

The reversion back to the 'Date' format of "dd Mmmm YYYY" should not be too difficult; as, it happened 'overnight' (or, possibly, during the day); and, should not really be too taxing, even given, the many competing priorities in "Family Tree" of (and, the Other parts of) "FamilySearch"; and, the very limited resources available to "FamilySearch".

Just, DO IT, sooner rather than later.

'Thank You' in advance.

Brett

.