>You and your user may feel that they have thought this out thoroughly, but it sure appears otherwise.
>The Y2K 'standards' have been set by persons far more skilled and talented than me or you or your users.

Jim, I have yet to meet someone that I feel is more skilled or more talented as me. Or more intelligent. Standards are set for MOST situations. There are always exceptions to the rule.

>
>So you *only* enter dates for renewals. Whether this is auto or property, don't you have to enter vehicle/property-build year, and cannot those be in the prior century (or at least beyond whatever 'window' you may have determined??? If life stuff, do you not have policyholders (even applicable to auto and property, for discounts and such) born in 18xx or 19yy where 'yy' is before your rollover year?
>

We deal with employee group benefits. Life, AD&D, Dependent Life, WI, LTD, Health, and Dental. We enter a lot of dates. But they are all in the past. In almost 15 years of business we have yet to enter a date more than 95 years in the past. If it happened, I'd have to get involved and hard code of just change the data for that one old person.

>Really, you would be much wiser to heed the experts who set the standards rather than to hang on to you and your users desires. Sometimes we do make wrong decisions, you know, and no matter how you feel about it, your position/decision is *wrong* here.

Jim, 2 digits is faster to enter than 4 digits. That is an advantage. Leave it up to the people who know the system and make their living with this system to weigh out the advantages and disadvantages.

Thanks for your advice. It is fully understood. It has been considered. That should be enough for you.

Joe