I can use proper version control for code, but when it comes to office products, I use an ISO date to prefix my "versions" of files. This is really an integrat

I can use proper version control for code, but when it comes to office products, I use an ISO date to prefix my "versions" of files. This is really an integration of proper version control within the workflow. I don't find it appropriate to blame the user when they are so misguided. Don't get me wrong, an ISO date prefix is nothing close to perfect for version control, but it: - works anywhere you are asked to name a sequence of things - tacitly communicates well the naming scheme so your colleagues can get it and possibly even start to imitate it - give a clear time referral - isn't sensible to system time-stamp, so this keep the chronology even when file are touched or copied elsewhere with a different time-stamp - spontaneously generate a chronologically ordered result of versions when their are displayed in list Once again, this is not my favorite way to organize things. But from a practical point of view, it often comes as the less worst solution you can run seamlessly.