[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: July/Aug Amsat Journal Y2K article

Ron Dunbar asked:
> I just received the July/August issue of the AMSAT Journal yesterday and
> read all the Y2K (The Millenium Problem) material with great interest.  A
> related article on page 16, "A Common Date/Time Standard for Amateur Radio"
> was also a very timely piece, but this article contained two points which
> confused me:
> (1) On p-17, column 1, next to last paragraph:  "The ISO 8601 document also
> contains the correct definitions for Leap Years (2000 is, 1900 was not!)".
> - Is this correct?  The information I have indicates that just the
> *reverse* is true ... simplified, my information states that 'Leap Years
> are any year which is evenly divisible by 4 ...  EXCEPT when it is *also*
> evenly divisible by 400'.

Ron -- You missed part of the Leap Year Algorithm -- a Leap Year is:

     Divisible by 4 = LY      (2000=yes)
*    unless divisible by 100  (2000=no)
     unless divisible by 400  (2000=yes)
     unless divisible by 1600 (fails test)

73, Tom

Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org