Richard Warr (12/26/2010)
I wasn't expecting the question to appear today - I was advised it would be tomorrow. That would have given me the opportunity to express the "fun" side of the question as something lightweight for the holidays.And whilst the explanation may indeed be "complete nonsense" according to BOL it does illustrate the differences that sometimes arise between the real world and one that exists purely of logic.
So, apologies for any upset caused. It was just supposed to be a bit of Christmas cheer.
No apologies needed, because no upset caused. As I said, I learned something from the question, and that is the only thing about QoTD that matters. So from where I stand, it was a really good question (questions I get right are somewhat boring) - and the fact that the explanation contains a bit of a red herring doesn't really matter.
But don't be surprised if someone who does know the data type and also knows that datetime2 literals as short as 10 characters are allowed answers "it works as expected" and then moans that they want their point back when told that's wrong.
Tom