Hi Jim ---

>I stand by my earlier point, the year has four digits, using short cuts for this fact got us in the current mess. Continuing to use two digit years is only causing the problem again.

Storing and calculating 2 digit years, not the display thereof got us into the Y2K mess IMHO.

>For example; what date is 3/25/92? To answer you must know something about how the system is hanlding the century. You cannot take the date at face value and know, exactly, what date it it. BTW, in my mind when I wrote the date here it was 3/25/1492 the year that Columbus "...sailed the ocean blue".

Fair enough....but I stated "in context" ... if the application requires dates from different centuries where the century is not always obvious, then you are very correct.