The timeline on the DVD *confirms* canon.

[Ali]

No: HPFGUIDX 55885

Jo Serenadust wrote:
 
 
>>> I'm not British (although my children were in the British school 
 system for a short time several years ago) but I've always defered 
 to the views of the British members of the fandom on this point.  I 
 didn't see the PoA quote as a Flint so much as an imprecise 
 statement by Dumbledore, which is of the type I hear teachers use 
 all the time (ie, speaking of "a class of hyperactive seven year 
 olds" when in fact 3 of them are really eight).  It was never 
 serious enough for me to consider an actual Flint.
 
<snip>
 
I meant was that the DVD timeline has introduced a potential Flint.  
If the birthdate had been 1979, then Hermione "fits" into the story 
as a product of the normal British educational system with its Sept 
1 cutoff.  Now that it lists the 1980 birth date, it just doesn't 
fit for me unless we get further information.  If JKR gives us some 
backstory for why Hermione is moved ahead in either a direct 
interview, or as part of a future book, then I'll be perfectly 
satisfied.  Until then, it's still questionable for me based on 
JKR's past inconsistencies with dates and numbers.

I respond:-

This is a me too post - with explanation:

JKR has based the Hogwarts school system on the English/Welsh system 
that she was brought up with. Children start Hogwarts when their 
Muggle counterparts go to secondary school, they can stay for the 
same 7 years and the September 1st date corresponds to the start of 
our school year. We have evidence that Cedric Diggory and (I think) 
Angelina turn 17 at the start of their 6th year indicating that they 
are following the Muggle Traditions that JKR has used so 
extensively - OWL levels: O'Levels, NEWTs: A'Levels. I would agree 
that this is only circumstantial evidence!

Prior to the DVD time line the only canon evidence we had indicating 
Hermione's birthday was Dumbledore's statement about two 13year old 
wizards - and again I agree with Jo's explanation for this. It is 
possible that Hogwarts runs along slightly different lines and it is 
possible that Hermione is a year ahead - due to her obvious academic 
talent. However, I do not believe that JKR wrote Hermione as being a 
year young for her year. This does happen very occasionally in 
Britain, but when it does, those children stick out like a sore 
thumb and get adverse attention. We see Hermione being "attacked" 
for being a know-it-all and for being a Muggle-born, but never for 
being a year ahead. 

Are we really to suppose that the Magic Quill not only looks at 
those born in the academic year under consideration, but also looks 
ahead to see if any children in the next year *might* be very 
talented and therefore capable of joining early?

I do believe that having the Autumn Equinox as the cut-off point 
would work, and JKR might try and tell us that Hermione is so 
brilliant that she did jump a year. What I will not believe (without 
evidence!) is that JKR thought all this up before she realised that 
there was a problem with the dates.

My impression is that whilst JKR is very pedantic and thorough with 
regards to some issues, dates and numbers are not amongst them. 
Thus, whilst I will believe that JKR authorised the DVD timeline and 
therefore *canonised* Hermione's birthday as later than Harry's, I 
cannot believe that she thought through all the implications of this 
particular date when she first wrote it - perhaps Heidi's idea of 
the Autumn equinox will give her a way out of this potential Flint.

Ali