Everett M. Greene wrote: > Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan) writes: > >> Why not a calendar of 12, 30 day months with 5 world days and a sixth >> every 4 years? That would certainly save our knuckles and between from >> being counting boards for the months. > > Such a calendar has been proposed but with 30-31-30 days > repeated four times with an extra day at the end of the > year. Another extra day can be added at the end of the > second quarter for leap years. That's one version of what is called the World Calendar. Each quarter has 91 days, which is exactly 13 weeks, and each quarter begins on a Sunday. Neither Year End Day nor Leap Year Day are assigned a day of the week, so apart from those extra days, each day in the year always falls on the same day of the week. This means that you never need to remember what day of the week March 10th is going to fall on, because it will always be a Friday. This idea is, unsurprisingly, deeply unpopular among the manufacturers of diaries and calendars, who have waged a vigorous and -- to date -- very successful campaign to prevent the World Calendar from being adopted. David Harper ;-) Cambridge, England

David Harper <devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> writes: > Everett M. Greene wrote: > > Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan) writes: > > > >> Why not a calendar of 12, 30 day months with 5 world days and a sixth > >> every 4 years? That would certainly save our knuckles and between from > >> being counting boards for the months. > > > > Such a calendar has been proposed but with 30-31-30 days > > repeated four times with an extra day at the end of the > > year. Another extra day can be added at the end of the > > second quarter for leap years. > > That's one version of what is called the World Calendar. > > Each quarter has 91 days, which is exactly 13 weeks, and each quarter > begins on a Sunday. > > Neither Year End Day nor Leap Year Day are assigned a day of the week, > so apart from those extra days, each day in the year always falls on the > same day of the week. > > This means that you never need to remember what day of the week March > 10th is going to fall on, because it will always be a Friday. > > This idea is, unsurprisingly, deeply unpopular among the manufacturers > of diaries and calendars, who have waged a vigorous and -- to date -- > very successful campaign to prevent the World Calendar from being adopted. > > David Harper ;-) > Cambridge, England I can't imagine calendar manufacturers being that upset by a different calendar. Most people use their calendars for appointments and other notes every year and will still need a new one each year. Day planners will still need new inserts every year. I'll still want new choo-choo train pitchers on my Union Pacific RR calendar each year. It's been rumored that other corporations are quite in favor of a change, so I doubt the calendar manufacturers can outpoint them if the desire for change is really there. Inertia, tradition, etc. is a more likely explanation for failure to adopt a better calendar. Of course, conversion is not a trivial matter.

On Mar 10, 5:49 pm, David Harper <devn...@obliquity.u-net.com> wrote: > > This means that you never need to remember what day of the week March > 10th is going to fall on, because it will always be a Friday. I can think of one disadvantage, which could make it personally not a good choice of calendar. Imagine if your birthday were on a Monday...it would *always* be on a Monday, and you'd never have the benefit of having it on a Saturday, etc... bb

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 03:11:03 -0700 (PDT), bblais <bblais@gmail.com> wrote: >I can think of one disadvantage, which could make it personally not a >good choice of calendar. Imagine if your birthday were on a >Monday...it would *always* be on a Monday, and you'd never have the >benefit of having it on a Saturday, etc... My birthday is on a Public Holiday so it wouldn't worry me :-) -- Bob