Good with graphic design? Lend a hand with ID cards!

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

You can email it to me at [e-mail], if that works for you?

[Victor Blazquez]

Oh ok cool, thank you! By the way do the cards have to have something on both sides and how big should they be? I don't want to do anything wrong. So if you could tell me some details it would be helpfull
Thank you!

Kindest regards,
Víctor Blázquez

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Yes, the cards should have both a front and a back. They should include space on the front for a photograph and a name (leave a lot of space for this, since some names are quite long). On the back, the text will remain roughly the same (although the date format will be changed to something else, pending the MinInt's decision) and other stuff like the SoS' name will be changed.

Please send your submission to me in some sort of format I can work with -- .psd or .xcf or the like.

[Victor Blazquez]

Ok Sir Alexandreu Davinescu, perfect. I'll do my best and try something.

Kind regards,
Víctor Blázquez

[Ián Tamorán S.H.]

May 6, 2016 8:31:05 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

The relevant law is "In commemoration of the longevity of Talossa, all newspapers and official documents bearing the year of publication are required to cite the year in both the Christian and Talossan form. The Talossan Year begins on the 26th of December, and 26 Dec 1979 was Year I of the Kingdom. For example, dates will henceforth be written: "Wednesday, October 21st, 1987/VIII."...

Hmmm - that's a law/rule that definitely needs updating ... not because of the discussion here, but because it incorrectly uses the word "Christian". The correct word is "Gregorian".

This year, 2016, is NOT two thousand and sixteen years after the birth of Jesus - we simply do not know what year that was. The choice of year we now use was made long after the event (in the sixth century). Because of the timing of census events, and references to rulers known outside of the Bible, many believe it could have been no earlier than year 6 A.D., or 9 A.D. or 4 B.C. or ... Also, many Talossans are not Christians and we should respect their individual beliefs. For more calendar details see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar

The current "2016" is the Gregorian Year of the Common Era. That is a bit of a mouthful, so some people not wishing to use A.D. use instead YCR (Year of Common Reckoning). I am certainly not suggesting that we adopt YCR as our abbreviation, nor always avoid A.D. - but we should, out of respect to our non-Christian brethren, drop the word "Christian" from that definition. And I say this as a practising Christian.

Does anyone want to Hopper a bill on this?

By the way, can you give me a reference to the name of the law containing that text, please - and (if possible) the Cosa and Clark?

[Danihel Txechescu]

May 6, 2016 14:07:24 GMT -6 Ián Tamorán S.H. said:

By the way, can you give me a reference to the name of the law containing that text, please - and (if possible) the Cosa and Clark?

I know that was for Alex, but since then he has written elsewhere and not here, I'll just go ahead and step in those toes:
  wiki.talossa.com/6RC37

[Ián Tamorán S.H.]

May 7, 2016 12:38:12 GMT -6 Danihel Txechescu said:

May 6, 2016 14:07:24 GMT -6 Ián Tamorán S.H. said:

By the way, can you give me a reference to the name of the law containing that text, please - and (if possible) the Cosa and Clark?

I know that was for Alex, but since then he has written elsewhere and not here, I'll just go ahead and step in those toes:
  wiki.talossa.com/6RC37

Aha! That Law does not say that all subsequent dates have to be written in that form - only that "Today's date" should be written in that form. The body of the Law states that both the Talossan and the Christian year should be quoted, and suggests the abbreviation A.R.T., without mandating it. Thus we are not constrained by this law from writing our dates in a different order - except for that date: "Wednesday, October 21st, 1987/VIII."

Ián Tamorán
2016-05-07/XXXVII

[Ian Plätschisch]

May 7, 2016 13:59:38 GMT -6 Ián Tamorán S.H. said:

May 7, 2016 12:38:12 GMT -6 Danihel Txechescu said:

I know that was for Alex, but since then he has written elsewhere and not here, I'll just go ahead and step in those toes:
  wiki.talossa.com/6RC37

Aha! That Law does not say that all subsequent dates have to be written in that form - only that "Today's date" should be written in that form. The body of the Law states that both the Talossan and the Christian year should be quoted, and suggests the abbreviation A.R.T., without mandating it. Thus we are not constrained by this law from writing our dates in a different order - except for that date: "Wednesday, October 21st, 1987/VIII."

Ián Tamorán
2016-05-07/XXXVII

I'm not so sure about that;

17. In commemoration of the longevity of Talossa, all newspapers and official documents bearing the year of publication are required to cite the year in both the Christian and Talossan form. The Talossan Year begins on the 26th of December, and 26 Dec 1979 was Year I of the Kingdom. For example, dates will henceforth be written: "Wednesday, October 21st, 1987/VIII." The abbreviation "A.R.T." is the equivalent to "A.D." and stands for "Anno Regni Talossae."

The words "For example" indicate that all dates must be fashioned that way.

[Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun]

And also, the word “henceforth”.

To be honest, I like DD-mmm-YY/t much better than anything, because it is unambiguous for everyone. And to be fair, S:reu Tamorán, German IDs do not use the ISO-standard at all: they use DD.MM.YY

While they do not use abbreviations for months, they do neither use the standard which you praise greatly, but instead the standard in Europe. Since Talossa does not belong to any supranational conglomeration, we can use our national standard as mandated by law. It is quite unambiguous, and if the Talossan version is the main version with the English version in a lighter shade directly below, plus maybe another language like Esperanto (?), it would not be tonguist.

[Victor Blazquez]

May 7, 2016 14:37:39 GMT -6 Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun said:

And also, the word “henceforth”.

To be honest, I like DD-mmm-YY/t much better than anything, because it is unambiguous for everyone. And to be fair, S:reu Tamorán, German IDs do not use the ISO-standard at all: they use DD.MM.YY

While they do not use abbreviations for months, they do neither use the standard which you praise greatly, but instead the standard in Europe. Since Talossa does not belong to any supranational conglomeration, we can use our national standard as mandated by law. It is quite unambiguous, and if the Talossan version is the main version with the English version in a lighter shade directly below, plus maybe another language like Esperanto (?), it would not be tonguist.

yeah I also prefer that format to write dates it makes the most sense out of all date formats and its spread widely across the EU

[Ián Tamorán S.H.]

May 7, 2016 14:21:26 GMT -6 Ian Plätschisch said:

17. In commemoration of the longevity of Talossa, all newspapers and official documents bearing the year of publication are required to cite the year in both the Christian and Talossan form. The Talossan Year begins on the 26th of December, and 26 Dec 1979 was Year I of the Kingdom. For example, dates will henceforth be written: "Wednesday, October 21st, 1987/VIII." The abbreviation "A.R.T." is the equivalent to "A.D." and stands for "Anno Regni Talossae."

The words "For example" indicate that all dates must be fashioned that way.

Aha! We have a problem A deep problem. The wording of the law, at the point to which I was directed is:

6RC37 — The National Calendar Act
In commemoration of the longevity of Talossa, all newspapers and official documents bearing the year of publication are required to cite the year in both the Christian and Talossan form. The Talossan Year begins on the 26th of December, and the current year (ending next 26 Dec) is the year VIII of the Kingdom. Today's date will henceforth be written: "Wednesday, October 21st, 1987/VIII." The abbreviation "A.R.T." is the equivalent to "A.D." and stands for "Anno Regni Talossae."

Proposed by: Robert Madison (PC-Vuode)

(1) This does not contain the words "For example", but instead the words "Today's date will"
(2) The word "henceforth" means "from this time forward" - the only meaning given in the Concise Oxford Dictionary.

Do we have a transcription error from the law as passed to the law as subsequently recorded (and possibly retyped)? If so, it is the law as passed that takes precedence.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

The provision I quoted is from el Lexhatx, which is our compiled legal code. There are no other stand-alone statutes, since all prior ones were repealed and no new ones have been passed since el Lexhatx was passed, two years ago. You can find our legal code, updated by the Royal Scribery and certified accurate, here at Lex.F.17.

[Ián Tamorán S.H.]

May 7, 2016 14:37:39 GMT -6 Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun said:

And also, the word “henceforth”.

To be honest, I like DD-mmm-YY/t much better than anything, because it is unambiguous for everyone. And to be fair, S:reu Tamorán, German IDs do not use the ISO-standard at all: they use DD.MM.YY

While they do not use abbreviations for months, they do neither use the standard which you praise greatly, but instead the standard in Europe. Since Talossa does not belong to any supranational conglomeration, we can use our national standard as mandated by law. It is quite unambiguous, and if the Talossan version is the main version with the English version in a lighter shade directly below, plus maybe another language like Esperanto (?), it would not be tonguist.

There is no standard in Europe. Each country writes its dates as they choose. The bulk of countries in Europe, it is true, use DD-MM-YY ... but this is now getting unwieldy, as we have had a change of century (and millennium), and there are numerous cases where automated determination of century have gone wrong. Horribly wrong. We now need to include the century in our dates - and this is generally recognised in Europe.

Those countries, both in Europe and round the world, that use dd-mmm-yy, where mmm is the alphabetic representation of the month - and hence related to the specific local language - are therefore locally specific, and understandable only by people who speak that language - at least to some extent. "I like" and "you like" are, alas, of no use here. What I personally like is of no use - if it were this would be an easy decision to make. Instead, what we have to find is what is right, and what is universally comprehensible. And that is the ISO standard - which is already used by thousands of millions of people. The USA date format is difficult for Europeans to understand instantly. The European date format is also difficult for USA people to understand instantly. The ISO standard has the same degree of comprehensibility for both Europeans and USA people - and for all other people in the world. (Note that I do not use the word "American", as the largest part of the American continent does not use mm-dd-yy. In fact, only the USA uses mm-dd-yy). No matter what, there are - in the world - more than ten times as many people that use DD-MM-YY as use MM-DD-YY. But despite that, I am not suggesting DD-MM-YY, but the International Standard - comprehensible by everyone in the world. And that format is already in use by more than one thousand six hundred million people. YYYY-MM-DD.

You are, my honourable friend, simply wrong when you say DD-mmm-YY/t is unambiguous for everyone: it has at least three major problems - (1) it relies upon language - some specific language - for the names of the months (a source of ambiguity), and (2) it is a date format that cannot be sorted (probably of no great relevance to us here in Talossa - but none the less a problem), and (3) it is in no way standard, and very difficult for non-USA-English-speaking people to understand (a source of ambiguity).

If Talossa is going to be international, then it has to be international. The only international date format is the ISO format, whether we like it or not.

Personally, I don't always like it either - but I use it all the time, because I have had to make international communication so often.

[Ián Tamorán S.H.]

May 8, 2016 15:38:21 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

The provision I quoted is from el Lexhatx, which is our compiled legal code. There are no other stand-alone statutes, since all prior ones were repealed and no new ones have been passed since el Lexhatx was passed, two years ago. You can find our legal code, updated by the Royal Scribery and certified accurate, here at Lex.F.17.

Does this mean that the laws as passed have "softly and silently" been mutated to the now recorded form? If so, these changes were not made clear, and - despite the passing of the all-encompasing bill - the certification of accuracy was incorrect. We have to think about this very carefully.

[Eðo Grischun]

Talossans just love to argue about EVERYTHING, eh?

Date format. We are seriously arguing about DATE FORMATS! 3 Witt pages deep! This is classic Talossa.

I don't know what the answer should be, I can only provide my own use and knowledge of date formats.

1: I have never heard of the ISO whatever. I have learned of its existence today. Throughout this thread the constant back and forth between ISO and non-iso has been very confusing. I admit, as bright as I can be, the ISO format (2016-01-03) would have me double checking if it was the 3rd of January or the 1st of March.

2: Locally, in Scotland, we use DD-MM-YY (or DD-MM-YYYY) ... today is 08-05-2016. We read and speak dates in the format of "the eighth of May, 2016".


IDEA:

How about we go a Talossan way?

How about we create our own date format?

Dxx-Mxx-YYYY or Dxx-Mxx-YYYY/t ?

So, for today we would write: D08-M05-2016 (or D08-M05-2016/t)

We simply input the letters D and M before the numbers?