this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2025
608 points (96.1% liked)

196

16842 readers
1195 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
moss@lemmy.blahaj.zone
greembow@lemmy.blahaj.zone
moss@lemmy.world
queue@beehaw.org
funky_rodent@lemmy.blahaj.zone
PeachyMcPeachface@lemmy.blahaj.zone
threegnomes@lemmy.blahaj.zone
greembow@lemmy.world
remotelove@lemmy.ca
Roflmasterbigpimp@feddit.de
A_Very_Big_Fan@lemm.ee
qaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone
A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
608
ISO 8601 ftw rule (gregtech.eu)
submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by lena@gregtech.eu to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
139 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

!iso8601@lemmy.sdf.org gang, rise up

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Bo7a@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

We can debate this all day. And I can't honestly say that I would take either side in a purely semantics argument.

But the wording comes directly from RFC3339 which is, to me, the definitive source for useful date representation.

https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3339.txt

5.1. Ordering

If date and time components are ordered from least precise to most precise, then a useful property is achieved. Assuming that the time zones of the dates and times are the same (e.g., all in UTC), expressed using the same string (e.g., all "Z" or all "+00:00"), and all times have the same number of fractional second digits, then the date and time strings may be sorted as strings (e.g., using the strcmp() function in C) and a time-ordered sequence will result.

[โ€“] Umbrias@beehaw.org 1 points 2 days ago

They chose poor words for this.