At 3/24/98 01:49 PM , Alan Geist wrote:

>On 23 Mar 98, David Gillett wrote:
>
>><snip>
>>3.  Errors due to non-Y2K-compliant systems can only be in terms of
>>getting the century wrong.  Last year, a member of Congress claimed
>>that systems like the DMV or SSI might mistake 25-year-olds for
>>75-year-olds and vice versa (amongst a list of other improbable
>>consequences...); this CAN'T happen.
><snip>
>
>Actually errors of mistaking a 25-year-old for a 75-year-old could
>happen.
>

Other errors could be introduced if fixes applied are not thoroughly
thought through.  Often companies use the "rule of 50" to fix applications
with the century problem. This is where the century is still not stored but
the processing is allowed with the assumption that any date entered with
year over 50 is 19xx and any year under 50 is 20xx.  We have had some funny
results when the programmer didn't think of all the possibilities of what
could be valid date entries.

Doug Simmons
WWW Pager: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/2402199
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++