Compact and useful agenda

[ktinkel]

Last year I bought a lovely agenda from Typotheque (the type foundry run by Peter Bilak). It cost a bit too much, but had many advantages: small size (about 3.25 X 5 inches, 3/16" thick), lovely paper (slick, thin, but not too transparent; with some gridded sheets in the back for sketching).

I have been living by it, so went to the Typotheque site (http://www.typotheque.com/site/index.php) looking for the 2006 book, to no avail. Sent them an e-mail, and got a reply: the next one will be available in two weeks. When it is ready, they will list it on the web site. (Feel free to go pester them in the meantime, however.)

Just thought I would mention it. If you need a sort of minimalist calendar book, to enter appointments and other cryptic information, this one is lovely. The only thing that would make it better would be a Moleskini-style elastic closure (but I have done fine with a rubber band rescued from a batch of asparagus, just to keep the pages from becoming splayed in my handbag).

My only criticism is the short date format: European, so that April 8 looks like 8/4. That would be August 4 to me, of course. I wrote to suggest that in the future it would be less ambiguous (and more international) to use alpha months: 8 Apr (or Apr 8) for example.

No response as of yet (I have annotated my copy just to avoid making appointments for the wrong date!).

Anyway, I do recommend this. All the other agendas I have considered are either too large in format or too thick. This one is perfect!

[Ian Petersen]

My only criticism is the short date format: European, so that April 8 looks like 8/4.Think of it as way to bring a little civilisation to the colonies. <g>

[ktinkel]

Think of it as way to bring a little civilisation to the colonies. <g>Now, now.

Use of number slash dates are always going to be ambiguous unless you life in a very small place and never venture out of it.

You know that. Whether your way is superior to ours (or not) is irrelevant. Hrmmmph.

[ElyseC]

You don't use a PalmOS device any more? The agenda sounds loverly, but my Palm handles that kind of stuff for me.

[ktinkel]

You don't use a PalmOS device any more? The agenda sounds loverly, but my Palm handles that kind of stuff for me.I bought an early Palm Pilot but never got used to using it. I like pencil and paper, and this little book fits neatly in the side pocket of my handbag.

[Ian Petersen]

Only kidding! But such a date is, after all, only ambiguous because a few misguided countries insist on writing their dates backwards! It's not ambiguous to a european - or the designers would surely not have used that format. Europe isn't that small ...

Of course one could argue we should all be using ISO dates but that's a whole other can of worms.

[Michael Rowley]

Ian:

Think of it as way to bring a little civilisation to the colonies

It would be more to the point if the diary gave all-numerical dates in the ISO format (today's date is 2005-10-11), but KT's other suggestion, which has worked well in anglophone countries for 60 years, is to give today's date as Oct 11 or 11 Oct.

One proviso, which I wish Americans would take notice of, is that October 11 2005 doesn't need that intrusive comma.

[ktinkel]

Only kidding! But such a date is, after all, only ambiguous because a few misguided countries insist on writing their dates backwards!Doesn’t really matter why, but if you want an international market — and I don’t think anyone would deny that the U.S. and Canada make a large enough market — do not use ambiguous dates in a calendar. Seems simple enough to me.

Trying to impute virtue (or sin) to any society or culture based on how they abbreviate dates is just plain silly.

I mentioned my concern to the designer of the agenda, by the way. He replied promptly, saying it looked clumsy to add the name of the month. Although I am a pragmatic form-follows-function sort of graphic designer myself, I bit my tongue. I love this little book, so will spend half an hour again when I get the next one clarifying things by adding the name of the month to the top of the pages! That too is clumsy looking, but only I will know it.

[Ian Petersen]

if you want an international market - do not use ambiguous dates in a calendarObviously they (the designers) didn't want, or at least expect, an international market. Trying to impute virtue (or sin) to any society or culture based on how they abbreviate dates is just plain silly.Of course. But I can't help feeling there's a certain wilfull lack of common sense involved. I could forgive writing the month before the day if the US (or UK for that matter) used strictly ISO dates (2005-10-11), but that is not the case. Month-day-year just goes against the grain - at least my grain!

[Michael Rowley]

Ian:

Month-day-year just goes against the grain

It's traditional in England: nearly every English newspaper has it at the top of the page. After all, most people assume the year they're in, and really the year is just for the benefit of the few people that look at copies of papers from previous years.

[Michael Rowley]

Ian:

I could forgive writing the month before the day if the US (or UK for that matter) used strictly ISO dates (2005-10-11)

It has only just dawned on me that this forum is using a bogus ISO form: 10-11-2005 for yesterday. US and UK all-numeric dates do not use hyphens but full stops or solidi, that's why ISO used the hyphen as a separator.

[ktinkel]

It would be more to the point if the diary gave all-numerical dates in the ISO format (today's date is 2005-10-11), but KT's other suggestion, which has worked well in anglophone countries for 60 years, is to give today's date as Oct 11 or 11 Oct.

One proviso, which I wish Americans would take notice of, is that October 11 2005 doesn't need that intrusive comma.Even I wish we did not need that comma.

Instead I tend to use 11 October 2005 — no punctuation required. But I am considered to be pretentious!

[Steve Rindsberg]

You might mention that it'll look clumsier still after you've hand annotated all of his carefully crafted typoography. Promise to do it with a fat, soft pencil. <g>

[Ian Petersen]

It's traditional in EnglandSo you say. But I don't honestly remember writing dates that way round when I lived there. Nor do I remember being confused, or even noticing any thing untoward about date or time formats, when I moved to the continent.

The only confusion in that respect is in english 'half three' means '30 minutes past three' whereas 'halv tre' in danish means '30 minutes past two'. Also europeans have a tendency to use week numbers which I'd never experienced in Britain. 'What are you doing in week 36', for example ...

[Mike]

Also europeans have a tendency to use week numbers which I'd never experienced in Britain. 'What are you doing in week 36', for example ...

I've only really come across week numbers when working in industry. When publishing schedules it saves using real dates so the same schedule can be used year after year without change.

When I worked at a university they used week numbers all the time. Week 1 was either the last week in September or the first week in October. For some purposes the weeks were numbered within semesters but for other they ran throughout the year. For some purposes vacation weeks were included in the numbering but for other purposes they weren't. So any one week could have a whole variety of numbers.

In the 25 years I worked there I never managed to know which week it was.

Some people said I never even new which day of the week it was, but that's another story. :confused:

[Michael Rowley]

Ian:

The only confusion in that respect is in english 'half three'

When I went to Dublin in 1951, the expression 'half three' (common there) was unknown to me: i only knew 'ha’past three'. But 'halb drei' has become familiar to me from long residence in Germany (as is the more treacherous 'viertel drei').

I don't know when numbered weeks came in, but it was during my life in Germany (1967–1988) and is certainly not widely known in England. However, I don't think anyone anywhere is good at saying when Week 1 is, except diary publishers.

[Michael Rowley]

KT:

I tend to use 11 October 2005

That's the most common English way, and you may have been influenced by US,UK, and NATO military writing, which has eschewed the all-numeric date form ever since the US & Britain became allies in WW2 and began joint operations (D-day would have been a fiasco if both parties had insisted on interpreting 7/4 their own way!).

[donmcc]

KT:

if both parties had insisted on interpreting 7/4 their own way!).

What happened on 7/4? I always thought D-Day was June 6, 1944. That would be the very consistent 6/6.

Don McCahill

[Michael Rowley]

Don:

I always thought D-Day was June 6, 1944

You're right. But it was postponed for at least 24 h, wasn't it? That would have made the planned D-day 5 Jun 44, which would have been 5.6.44 by British reckoning, 6.5.44 by American.