If IBM is treating it as such, where are my events for 2/29/2000?  It's
OK for my "ANY" day jobs, but it should mess up my specific day
schedules.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Raibeck [SMTP:storman AT US.IBM DOT COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 1998 11:07 AM
> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject:      Re: Y2K...!
>
> Actually, I believe that the Julian calendar had a leap year as being
> every 4
> years, while the switch to the Gregorian calendar introduced the more
> complex
> rule of century years not being leap years, unless divisible by 400.
> This makes
> 2000 a leap year. I never heard of a rule stating that millenium years
> were not
> leap years.
>
> In any event, I believe that for Y2K purposes 2000 is being treated as
> a leap
> year. I know that IBM is treating it as such.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andy
>
> Andy Raibeck
> IBM Storage Systems Division
> ADSM Client Development
> e-mail: storman AT us.ibm DOT com
>
>
>
> ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU on 06/17/98 07:56:06 AM
> Please respond to ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> cc:
> Subject: Re: Y2K...!
>
>
> >>ANR2631E QUERY EVENT: Invalid begin date - 02/29/2000.
> >
> >It would be interesting to know how it reacts to a query of another
> >leap year in that millenium, as in "q event * *
> begindate=02/29/2004".
> >That is, is ADSM just confused about the centenary, or other leap
> >years beyond 2000 as well.        Richard Sims, BU
>
> As the first leap year of the millenium, that should work.
>
> Fred Johanson
> System Administrator
> SEA
> NSIT
> University of Chicago
> 773-702-8464
>
>
>