TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Another thing about 2000 From:David Ibbetson <ibbetson -at- IDIRECT -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 1 Feb 1996 12:44:51 -0500
John Wilcox writes:
The addition of an extra day (oops, there's a superfluous modifier) every
four years to correct for the fact that a day is slightly less than 24
hours long results in a tiny overcorrection. So supposedly each year
that is divisible by 400 is NOT supposed to be a leap year. In spite of
this, a zillion programs have been written to use the standard leap year
algorithm. Simply to avoid patching so many programs, I suppose 2000
will indeed be a leap year. Have you heard anything definite?
========================
Almost everybody is now using the Gregorian calendar. [The main exception is
the Orthodox Church. Orthodox Christmas Day (25 Dec in the Julian Calendar)
corresponds to Jan 7 of the following year in the Gregorian calendar.]
Under the Gregorian calendar centuries are only leap years if they are
divisible by 400. e.g.
1900 was NOT a leap year
2000 will be a leap year
2100 will NOT be a leap year.
