RFC 3339 vs ISO 8601 (ijmacd.github.io)
from syklemil@discuss.tchncs.de to programming@programming.dev on 27 Oct 14:59
https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/47723320

Or: XKCD 1179 has its heart in the right place, but we can only wish it was actually that simple

#programming

threaded - newest

billygoat@catata.fish on 27 Oct 15:19 next collapse

This has the “just one more bro” feel to it.

lukalix98@programming.dev on 27 Oct 15:48 next collapse
  • We need a new standard that unifies all 14 standards.
  • Proceeds to create a new standard
  • There are 15 standards.
joyjoy@lemmy.zip on 27 Oct 17:44 collapse

The only way to fully unify all 14 standards is to support all 14 standards.

cgtjsiwy@programming.dev on 27 Oct 16:43 next collapse

This is missing the biggest difference: ISO 8601 costs 190-450€, whereas RFC 3339 is free.

palordrolap@fedia.io on 27 Oct 20:35 collapse

TIL that, at least according to the linked page, YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm:ss (or %Y-%M-%D %h:%m:%s in strftime format) isn't valid in either system.

ISO8601 apparently disallows spaces altogether, so that space should be a T for it to qualify there; RFC3399 allows the space, but insists there should be a UTC offset of some kind at the end.

Unrelatedly, the page's use of %Z and %z doesn't match with strftime formatting at all, so there's at least one other standards problem lurking here.