Spyke
slrpnk.net

And it is easily extensible to YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss to include the time of day

102
blazeknavereply
lemmy.world

I've never met a fellow Templatr in the wild lol

My daily note broke and my life fell apart for a minute.

Have you also spent months building your Data Capture Workflow mermaid.js? 😅😬

3
slrpnk.net

Not quite months, but definitely weeks 😂 Obsidian can be such a rabbit hole. If I tweak that last template one more time, then I’ll finally be done, I swear!

2

So I'm like 80% done with my setup. Mostly focused on routine and habit templates, homepage wiki for pkm etc.. between the plugins and css, no matter which device I'm on, it's the slowest app I've ever used. This is why I pushed my old setup and started over clean with more knowledge. I don't know how to get the customization I want without insane unusable lag

1
beanreply
lemmy.world

I feel called out and I’m hiding in the bushes reading comments.

6

It's called feeling seen and finding you're not alone. Do you type "# " while screen sharing in work apps to no avail and the chagrin of colleagues? It's okay. Me too.

2
brsrklfreply
jlai.lu

Won't be true after 9999-12-31, however.

42
BigFigreply
lemmy.world

Can't wait for the Y40k bug, when Tyranids begin to infect our brains.

36
lemmy.world

Bold of you to assume there isn't already a genestealer cult on Terra. Washington specifically.

9

Can be solved with a small shellscript adding a leading zero to all filenames with the format.

17

If I, my software, or my data last this long, I will have nearly 8000 years to resolve it. Which is to say, the year 9998 is going to get busy.

15
programming.dev

I’d be curious to see a sorting algorithm that doesn’t handle YYYYY-MM-DD with YYYY-MM-DD properly. If you drop the dashes you still get a proper numeric order. If you sort by component, you still get the proper order. Maybe a string sort wouldn’t? Off the top of my head the languages I’m thinking either put longer strings later, giving us the proper order, or could put 1YYYY- ahead of 1YYY-M so maybe string sorting is the only one that’s out.

2
HailHydrareply
infosec.pub

Lexical sorting (string sorting/alphabetical order sorting) is what I believe they were referring to when talking about file names.

The fact that you don't have to do any parsing of the string at all, just do a straight character-by-character alphabetical sort, and they will be sorted by date, is a great benifit of this date scheme. That means in situations where no special parsing is set up (eg, in a File Explorer windows showing a folders contents sorted alphabetically) or where your string isn't strictly date only (eg, a file name format such as '2025-05-02 - Project 3.pdf') you can still have everything sorted by date just by sorting alphabetically.

Its this benifit that is lost when rolling over to 5-digit years.

18

I bet you could make a one liner to rename files with YYYY-MM-DD to 0YYYY-MM-DD fairly easily. Not a problem.

2

It's an easy fix at least, just check if you're comparing numbers on both sides and switch to a simple numerical sort.

I think Windows used to get this wrong, but it was fixed so long ago that I'm not even sure now.

1

The good ones tend to filter their way out.

(I do also read whatever John Allison is currently working on.)

5

Omg thank you!! Everyone sees my notes thinks I'm crazy for obsessing... It's the correct fucking sort!

8
discuss.tchncs.de

Alt text:

ISO 8601 was published on 06/05/88 and most recently amended on 12/01/04.

88
lemmy.ca

But… that’s not the right way. Are you saying the ISO8601 violates ISO8601?

  • so, apparently not I just whooshed, I didn’t even noticed the dates are ambiguous.
11
fedia.io

The joke is that they've not been given in ISO8601 format, and also that they're both ambiguous. For the second one, we can't even tell which of the ends is the year.

56
brsrklfreply
jlai.lu

Publication 1988-06-05, latest amendment 2004-12-01.

I almost expected the two dates to use different formats, but no, they're just both "the American way".

21

Might be the best xkcd alt text of all time. I knew if from memory, and as soon as I saw the comic I thought "I bet someone quoted the alt text in the top comment".

3

I am a big fan of iso 8601, I just wish it was possible to write more dates than February 27th, 2013 with it

69
programming.dev

There are several people in the comments saying they have to use 27 Feb 2013 because they work with people all over the world. I’m really confused - what does that solve that 2013-02-13 does not? I know that not every language spells months the English way so “Dec” or “May” aren’t universal. Is there some country that regularly puts year day month that would break using ISO 8601 or RFC 3339?

48
Salehreply
feddit.org

I think learning all abbreviations for different months in different languages is more complicated than just learning that the time is sorted from largest to smallest unit.

38
lemmings.world

No! It’s the other way around, from largest to smallest is a mess and it makes no sense

-18

If you name files or other data with ISO 8601 then they're always sorted chronologically when you go largest to smallest.

13
modelerreply
lemmy.world

I know, right! I've been campaigning for this for everyday numbers. For example, twenty seven should be written smallest first: 72. Likewise this year is 5202, and next year 6202. That way no-one's going to be confused at all.

8
sajuukarreply
retrolemmy.com

27 Feb 2013 is unambiguous- regardless of where you're from or how you write your dates, you can't confuse 2013 for the month or day, you can't confuse Feb for a day or week, and if you can't figure 27 out, then we have bigger problems!

-1
programming.dev

2013-02-27 is also unambiguous unless you’re aware of a country that uses year day month, is not?

25
lemmy.world

2013-02-27 is also unambiguous.

Hey what's today's date?

It's 2025 -

No like the DAY?

Yeah, it's 2025, 02 -

Not the month, the day - What's today's actual date?

Like I was saying, if you'd let me finish, "2025 - 02 - 27"

I'm mostly joking, but when it comes to info about dates, I think the most evctive format it one that organizes the information within a heirachy that provides follow up answers.

Formatting dates as day / month / year does just that. Provides the day it is, followed by the month and year as that is the order that information is usually needed in.

I find providing the year first (or month) is much more ambiguous as neither are the day the actual date falls on.

-20

I was said that western mindset goes from small scale to larger scale, like 02-05-2025. Hmm, maybe that's West vs East propaganda material?

1
slrpnk.net

We need to get rid of the month/day and just refer to days by number. Today is day 121 in the year 2025, it's super clear.

9

If you need to ask for the current date so often, I suggest getting a watch. (not sure if joking vs predisposed for this part)

If you're asking so often about recent things then, yes, hearing the redundant parts out loud is only irksome because they've already been delivered to you (by yourself).

On the other hand, if you're asking someone when an arbitrary event happened (e.g. when reminiscing), having the year first quickens context.

4

Counterpoint: What you say applies in daily life, not when querying an archive of any kind. Year-month-day is the natural sorting order if the question is "which file/folder/column in the spreadsheet is the one I need?" In which case you narrow it down to first the year, then the month, then the day.

I started using YYYY-MM-DD to name files and directories once I noticed that they then became automatically sorted chronologically when I sort the containing directory alphabetically by file name.

4

Time travelers would have to endure a few less awkward moments though.

2

Which I was the justification used when my work decided to use 2025-May-01.

It’s close enough to the iso date that nobody will be confused but with that 1 extra layer of security blanket to separate months and days.

Of course, that does ruin sorting, so I think it was a bit silly, nobody has ever used yyyyddmm so it’s all a bit theoretical to me.

5

I used to work for a company that agreed with you, well at least some clown in management did. Even though it was an Australian company, at least part of the problem was we had an office in Manila, and they speak "American English" which seemed to include the awful date system too. We dealt with a lot of files being issued to clients / received from vendors etc. Because the "official" system used those fucked up dates, everyone ran their own secondary sets of data folders in / out with everything done in ISO dates so you could actually sort it properly.

2

It solves the familiarity problem, when getting somebody to do something by a date they readily understand at a glance takes precedence over making everybody in the world change a lifelong habit.

-2
sh.itjust.works

When someone asks you what date it is, no one says it's 2025 May 5th. We all know what year it is, and we all know what month we are in. It's the day component that is usually the unknown.

-19
lemmy.world

we all know what month we are in

Literally had two coworkers today that did not realize it was May

17

Guilty of that myself this very day. I did it a very spectacular way too. Some coworkers came up to me and said "man, April was a busy month for you!" I boldly replied "and it ain't even over yet!" I was promptly corrected.

4

Writing dates is usually in order to keep track for the future, when the year and month may be different.

9

That's locality of reference, though, similar to how you can say "here" or "there" for spatial coordinates. Everybody is aware of the year and month, so you omit it as given. The order of significance is still year, month, day.

Imagine if a harried time traveler jumped out of their time machine and asked you the date. Would it make sense to say, "Why, it's the 1st." (Or more possible, if a friend awoke from a coma.) If you ask somebody when they were born, most people will give the year at minimum. Of course, there are some weirdos out there, and you recognize them when you ask when they were born, and they say, "on a Tuesday." Same for the date of the Norman invasion of Great Britain. If you don't already have some sense of history, then knowing it happened about the 20th isn't very edifying.

7

I propose that we amend the ISO to require the days of the week be named after their etymological roots in that language.

English Days of the Week:
Day of the Sun
Day of the Moon
Day of Týr
Day of Odin
Day of Thor
Day of Frēa
Day of Saturn

Imagine dating a meeting, "Day of Odin, May 7, 2025." Imagine a store receipt that says, "Day of Thor, June 5, 2025." Imagine telling a friend, "July 4th falls on a Day of Frēa this year!"

THIS IS WHAT WE COULD HAVE. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE LOST. THIS IS WHAT WAS STOLEN FROM US.

We could bring it back. We could make this the norm. We could make this real. We could summon this bit of ancient magic back into our world. Let's remember what we actually named these days for! BRING BACK THE DAY OF THOR!

47
lemmy.world

My goodness, some of the comments in here must come from people who thought that those writing the standard were morons who did no research.

32

I don’t think they’re morons…just slaves to convention and compatibility. Not many ways to get away from that and justify it.

-1
arc
lemm.ee

The sane way of dealing with it is to use UTC everywhere internally and push local time and local formatting up to the user facing bits. And if you move time around as a string (e.g. JSON) then use ISO 8601 since most languages have time / cron APIs that can process it. Often doesn't happen that way though...

30

Generally yes, that's the way to do it, but there are plenty of times where you need to recreate the time zone something was created for, which means additionally storing the time zone information.

7

Definitely. If your servers aren't using UTC, then when you're trying to sync data between different timezones, you're making it harder for yourself.

4

This is what I try to do in the few apps I've written that had to deal with dates and times

3
lemmy.world

The BEST way is to use the number of seconds after the J2000 epoch (The Gregorian date January 1, 2000, at 12:00 Terrestrial Time)

1
arcreply
lemm.ee

ISO 8601 goes from 1582 (Julian calendar adoption) but can go even further with agreement about intention and goes down beyond the millisecond. Not sure why I want an integer from the year 2000 which only represents seconds.

1

Simplicity and precision.

Who said it was only measured as an integer? Seconds are a decimal value and many timekeeping applications require higher precision than to the millisecond. Referencing an epoch closer to our current time allows greater precision with a single double-precision floating point number.

Want to reference something before J2000? Use a negative number.

It’s independent of earth rotation, so no need to consider leap second updates either unless you are converting to UTC. It’s an absolute measure of time elapsed.

1
arcreply

The clue was in "user facing bits". UTC represents time as an absolute. If you want to show local time, or deal with daylight savings you run UTC through a function on its way to the user.

1
De_Narmreply
lemmy.world

Do you know why one would ever do that? 20(02/05)25 feels like the "Don't Dead Open Inside" of dates.

15

ISO 8601 allows all kinds of crazy time stamps. RFC 3339 is much nicer and simpler, and the sweet spot is at the intersection of ISO 8601 and RFC 3339.

Then again, ISO 8601 contains some nice things that RFC 3339 does not, like ranges and durations, recurrences...

https://ijmacd.github.io/rfc3339-iso8601/

18

RFC-3336

I figured there were problems with existing calendars, so I created a new one to supersede all others. That reminds me, though: I need to declare the "official" format for the calendar, to avoid all this nonsense.

I see a window of opportunity, here. Normally, there's no chance for any calendar revision to succeed in adoption; however, I think if I use the right words with the President, I could get it pushed into adoption by fiat. Y'all had best start learning my new calendar to get ahead of everyone else.

Note for the humorously disadvantaged: the Saturnalia Calendar is a mechanism through which I'm playing with a new (to me) programming language. I am under no disillusion that anyone else will see the obvious advantages and clear superiority of the Saturnalia Calendar, much less adopt it. And no comments from the peanut gallery about the name! What, did you expect me to actually spend time thinking of a catchy name when a perfectly good, mostly unused one already existed?

17

If it isn't carved into a sheet of limestone using the Mayan character set, I don't want to read about it.

4

That's where I started. I wanted a little project to try V on, and had come across the IFC, so I wrote a thing. While I was doing that, I got to thinking about the deficiencies and inherited complexities in IFC, and thought up Saturnalia.

If you pop up to my profile in Sourcehut, you'll find a similar program - just a lot longer and more complex, for IFC.

I don't know if they makes me a genius, but yes. Yes it does.

2
waiglreply
lemmy.world

Why does nobody mention the Discordian calendar? 5 days per week, 73 days per month, 5 months to a year (Chaos, Discord, Confusion, Bureaucracy and the Aftermath). On leap years, it adds one additional day (St. Tib's day) with a name but no numerical date.

4
glaberreply
lemm.ee

Hey, I quite like this! You're the first person I've found that's thought of fixing the calendar by adopting six-day weeks. I have a very similar personal version, with two main differences:

  • there's a leap week instead of a leap day, that way weekdays are always the same without having to skip any and every year has a whole number of weeks (either 61 most years [roughly 7 out of every 8] or 60 on short years [roughly 1 out of every 8])
  • December includes this leap week and it's either 30 or 36 days long, depending on the year. I put it at the end of December for the same logic that you put Saturnalia at the end of the year, to not mess with cardinal dates and so that the Xth day of the year is always the same date

I also came to the same conclusion about workweeks. With two-day weekends, the Gregorian calendar has 71 % of workdays but the new calendar only has 67 %. On a thirty-day month this means 20 workdays instead of 21,5. Having the six-day week could also theoretically allow for a move to three- or two-day weeks in a post-scarcity future and doing away with weekends, as well has having either 50 % or 67 % of the workforce being active every day of the week, and not the wild levels of fluctuation seen today. Not having 100 % commuting some days of the week and a fraction of that on others would allow to scale things like transport infrastructure much more effectively

2
glaberreply
lemm.ee

Only in eight year chunks. By year seven there is more unalignment than there was in year one, but it goes back to normal on year eight. Same thing as with leap days, just a slightly bigger scale.

In fact, with current rules, the shift in the regular Gregorian calendar becomes quite big when considering 100-year and 400-year cycles. In theory, a leap week calendar with new and updated rules could have a very comparable if not a smaller average deviation from the true solar date, though I haven't ran the precise calculations

1

Ok, so, first, let me say that while I'm enthusiastic about the concept, I understand it's entirely theoretical. We can't even get US civilians to adopt metric, FFS. Just a caveat, lest anyone wander by and overhear us.

That said, I did spend some cycles trying to see it it would be possibly to line up a lunar and solar calendar, and it's not. And it isn't nearly as important as it used to be. It would still have been nice.

So if you do run calculations, I'd like to see them.

2
glaberreply
lemm.ee

Here they are! Orange represents my Leapweek calendar and blue is Gregorian. The Y-axis is deviation from the tropical year and the X-axis is the year number. It's a 19200-year cycle to allow for both Gregorian and Leapweek to do entire iterations of their 400-year and 768-year cycles, respectively.

The Gregorian rules are, as you already know: if a year is divisible by 4, it is a leap year; unless it is divisible by 100, when it is a common year; unless it is also divisible by 400, in which case it is actually a leap year.

My Leapweek rules are: years divisible by 8, are leap (short, with 360 days instead of the usual 366) years, as are years divisible by 768 (after subtracting 4 so as not to clash with years divisible by 8). Just two rules as opposed to Gregorian's three, but they result in almost perfect correction: it takes 625 000 years to fall out of sync by 1 day, as opposed to Gregorian's 3 216 years for the same amount)

The catch is that Leapweek falls out of sync by up to 5½ days either way in between 768-year cycles, and up to 2½ days either way in between 8-year cycles. But they average out.

About the lunisolar I'm afraid to say that I ran into the same issue. Lunations are a very inconvenient duration to try and fit into neat solar days and months.

I wish it weren't as theoretical, because I really like this calendar, but yea. It's one of those things that will be impossible to change even though there's arguably better options. It's too arbitrary yet too essential and it goes in the same box as the metric second/minute/hour, the dozenal system and the Holocene calendar.

Here's a challenge though: try and devise a Martian calendar! That one is not standardised yet. I had good fun trying to match the Martian sol and year to metric units of time and maybe giving some serious use to the kilosecond, megasecond and gigasecond

As an extra, here's a 1000-year version of the graph at the start of the reply, with the current year 12 025 of the Holocene calendar :^) in the middle

1

This is fantastic. I'm going to have to spend more time with it.

Since we're discussing timescales over which there's a not insignificant chance something radical will happen to society, there's also the fact that the day is getting longer by 2ms every hundred years. If you're scheduling out 625,000 years, that's 12-some seconds by the end, compounded - 6 extra seconds every day by the 312,000th year, etc.

2
lemmy.world

I regularly work with Americans, Canadians, and Europeans. So many times each group defaults to their own format and mistakes occur I gave up on all the formats listed by OP. If i have to write a date in correspondence its like: Feb 27th 2013. No ambiguity. No one has ever challenged me on it either. It is universally understood.

13

My biggest point of professional pride was the time my boss sent a mass group text to all his employees asking them to format dates the way I do

He didn't say it was the format I used, so I didn't speak up and say "it's actually ISO-8601," because I assume my coworkers who were used to writing things like "February 27 8:00-4:45" rather than "2013-02-27 8:00-4:45 (8:45)" may stab me

2
Mr. Satanreply
lemm.ee

Jokes on you, I can't fucking rember which English month is which. April, May, July and Autum is just a grey mass to me.

7
SippyCupreply
feddit.nl

Autumn is a season lol

I think you mean August.

September, October, November and December are easy to remember because they're Roman numbers. 7-10 But two off because at some point they added July and August to honor Julius Augustus. So "month seven" is the 9th month.

5

Honestly I do remember some months, like starting and ending of the year. I don't encounter English month names on a regular enough basis to remember their order and my month names in no way relate to English ones.

So anything after February and before August I have to google each time I encounter them.

It doesn't help that we don't even have month abbreviations like English does (Jan, Feb, etc.).

3
FelixCressreply
lemmy.world

You meant 27th Feb 2013, right? It is utterly moronic to have day in the middle irrespectively if you start with or finish on the year.

1
lemmy.world

You meant 27th Feb 2013, right?

Does it matter anymore with this format? You figured out the exact day, month, and year irrespective of the order.

5
shrugsreply
lemmy.world

It's not about understanding. It's about sorting,

Everybody understand both notations, but if you use it for filenames sorting is important. Natural sorting order is an important feature that should be considered.

day month year is just stupid in that regard. Not only does the of the month depend on the language, but also if sorted you get the first of every month grouped together.

3

If you're listing dates, then using a sortable format is ideal. But if you're just referencing one in the middle of a correspondence, it's best to use whatever format the recipient is most familiar with. No one is sorting emails by a date given in the third paragraph

1
sh.itjust.works

I assume it depends on geographical region, but I've never heard someone say out loud "27th of February, 2013." It's always "February 27th, 2013." Writing it down like that could be easier to parse for people who are used to that format

2
sh.itjust.works

No, I'm American

I want to get ahead of this debate, and point out that a) "American" as a demonym for literally anyone in the western hemisphere is largely useless, b) the USA is the only country which includes "America" in its name, and c) USian is not more precise because there are two countries with United States in their name.

1
sh.itjust.works

No, I'm American. It looks like you started writing this comment before I made the edit to mine, so I'll go ahead and copy/paste it here

a) "American" as a demonym for literally anyone in the western hemisphere is largely useless, b) the USA is the only country which includes "America" in its name, and c) USian is not more precise because there are two countries with United States in their name.

1

So, you are a USian. I thought so. I never ever heard someone saying "February 27th 2018", I think only USians do that. Everywhere else it is 27th of February 2018 which is logical.

1

Issue: there are 27 different ways of writing a date.

Engineers: We most make a common standard that is unambiguous, easy to understand and can replace all of these.

Issue: there are 28 different ways of writing a date.

Joke aside, I really think the iso standard for dates is the superior one!

13
programming.dev

I feel like YYYYMMDD (without dashes) might be a format in ISO 8601, but I'm fully expecting to be corrected soon. But I didn't say think, I said feel. YYYYMMDD has a similar vibe to YYYY-MM-DD, ya feel me?

11
slrpnk.net

Nope, you are correct! From the Wikipedia page, which cites the standards document:

  • Representations can be done in one of two formats – a basic format with a minimal number of separators or an extended formatwith separators added to enhance human readability. The standard notes that "The basic format should be avoided in plain text." The separator used between date values (year, month, week, and day) is the hyphen, while the colon is used as the separator between time values (hours, minutes, and seconds). For example, the 6th day of the 1st month of the year 2009 may be written as "2009-01-06" in the extended format or as "20090106" in the basic format without ambiguity.
12
lemmy.world

Until microsoft makes that the default down in the lower right corner, I don't think we'll make much headway. I've been trying to get my office to do their dated files in YYYYMMDDHHMM for years. I do mine that way but I can't get anybody else to comply. This meme lists that as a discouraged format, I guess the dashes are ISO but I don't care about the dashes. I would accept doing YYYY-MM-DD over MMDDYYYY any time though.

9

The Microsoft thing is entirely regional. It's not that Microsoft does dates a certain way, it's your regional defaults. I live in a country that does dates the ISO and the computer displays them thay way.


Someone once told me that american date format follows the same pattern as regular speech. Like "26th of April, 2004. It made some sense to me, but that still feels a silly reason to discard just the sorting benefits.

5

ISO 8601 recommends inserting a T between the calendar date portion and the time of day portion. So: 20250501T2210+00.

5

All my coworkers now know that’s how dates work… I send out all of the reports and they can tear YYYYMMDD out of my arthritis-ridden hands

1
lemmy.world

I work at a global company an in my team there are people from 5 continents. we use 27-Feb-23. It's the only way nobody gets confused and it's only 1 char more. (Tbf nobody would be confused only my boss that is american lol)

6
lambipappreply
lemmy.world

Are you planning stuff 2 years ahead already?

I would still be confused by this..

13
lagoon8622reply
sh.itjust.works

You can even save a character by using NATO dates (leaving out the useless hyphens): 01DEC1953

0

That format near the cat's tail should have used hue to differentiate year/month/day...

5

In the last company I work for, the department was created from zero, and my boss just let me take all the technical decisions so from the begging everything was wrote in ISO-8601. When I left it was just the way it was, if you try to use any other date format anywhere something is going to give you an error.

5

So, assuming you got the time wrong and meant you could confuse year and time of day, ISO also puts time after date.

2025-05-01T18:18:03Z

Which makes sense. Higher unit to lower unit.

9

10:13pm or 8:13pm? I can see how this is confusing… perhaps another cartoon with more guidance might be needed.

Personally I like date time groups: 272013 Feb 2013

3
jbkreply
discuss.tchncs.de

with ISO 8601:

Sure, how about 2018-W06-1? Or 2018-036?

ISO 8601 contains way too many obscure formats. RFC 3339 is pretty much a subset and defines only sensible ones. It also allows 2018-02-05 08:02:43-00:00 (no T and explicitly specifying no timezone)

https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/10487289

2

Acquiring the document (legally) to ensure compliance for ISO 8601 is relatively expensive for a single person (~$200 USD), while RFC 3339 is accessible for free.

3
lemmy.world

You know, I used to think ISO 8601 was just a boring technical standard for writing dates. But now I see it’s clearly the first step in a grand master plan! First, they make us write the year first, then the month, then the day-suddenly, our beloved 17.05.2025 turns into 2025-05-17. My birthday now looks like a WiFi password, and my calendar feels like a math equation.

But it doesn’t stop there. Today it’s the date format, tomorrow we’ll all be reading from right to left, and before you know it, our keyboards will be rearranged so QWERTY is replaced with mysterious squiggles and dots. Imagine the panic:

“First they came for our dates, then they came for our keyboards!”

At this rate, I’ll be drinking mint tea instead of coffee, my local kebab shop will start offering lutefisk shawarma, and Siri will only answer to “Inshallah.” The right-wing tabloids will have a field day:

“Western Civilization in Peril: Our Months and Days Held Hostage!”

But let’s be honest-if the worst thing that happens is we finally all agree on how to write today’s date, maybe world peace isn’t so far off. Until then, I’ll be over here, clutching my calendar and practicing my right-to-left reading skills… just in case.

(Don’t worry,this was just a joke! No offense intended-unless you’re a die-hard fan of confusing date formats, in which case, may the ISO be ever in your favor!)

Peace!

3

Is there an ISO standard for how to say, "I don't agree with a very specific aspect of your politics, or a specific statement one of your political heroes made, for a very specific reason, but I'm not declaring myself at the extreme horrible kitten-eating end of whatever political spectrum you live in."

3
ani.social

Nothing irritates me more than the "01-May-25", "DD-Mon-YY" i.e. the way Oracle databases format dates by default.

2

From my reading, it's quite ambiguous. It could be 2025-05-01 or 2001-05-25.

9
lemmy.world

Everyone should use date-time groups so we're all on the same page down to the second.

DDHHMMSSZmmmYY

2
m_‮freply
discuss.online

Do you mean the post titles? I've been using the same format as was used since before I took over posting, but if people want ISO format that works for me

1
abbadon420reply
lemm.ee

I'm all for ISO format. I can't imagine anyone having objections.

2

No hablo inglés y no sé cuál es "february". How about that? Only Arabic numbes survive internationally.

1

I was going to comain until I realized that the fprmat is the one that I prefer.

0

I’m not a computer and this isn’t work so I’m gonna just use my confusing date format.

-1
feddit.org

I'm working in an international company with colleagues around the world. To avoid confusion, I switched to using this format:

27-FEB-2013

-1
sh.itjust.works

I deal with a lot of old records and boy I really prefer iso when you have to look at a lot of dates and things are in all different years, it's helpful. Have you tried ISO? I also do a lot of international work and haven't heard complaints about it being confusing.

4

I honestly prefer ISO, but as soon as a US colleague is involved, things get messy. That's my experience from the last 10 years or so.

1
lemm.ee

I just don't like to be forced to include the damn year everytime, and if you cut the year from ISO 8601 you get the american MM-DD order, which everybody hates.

I like DD/MM/YYYY. 🤷🏻‍♂️

-2

If it's just in casual conversation or emails DD/MM/YYYY is fine, but if you're naming documents or something in a professional setting, you should really always include the year anyway.

5

This format can fuck off. I prefer the unambiguous format 2FEB2013.

Checkmate, date snobs.

And yes, nations are free to use their appropriate abbreviations for the months.

-3

Working for a global clinical research company, DD-Mmm-YYYY is the easiest for everyone to understand and be on the same page. It's bad enough identifying which date you're capturing in metadata without also trying to juggle multiple date formats.

-4
lemmy.world

Feb 27th 2013

Boom. Everything is in a different format so you can order it however you want and it's still readable.

-4
Bourffreply
lemmy.world

Why use abbreviations in your preferred language when you can have a solution that is language-agnostic and universal (for a given calendar) ?

7
sh.itjust.works

Because if there's one problem simple enough that I trust an LLM or translation app not to fuck up, it's simple translation of month labels from on language to another. If you're writing in English, it's reasonable to have month abbreviations in English. If someone wants to read it in a different language, they're going to have to use translation software or hire a human translator to do it. And regardless of translation method, simple date translation will be among the most reliable and faithfully translated parts.

-3

Or, you know, just use plain old numerals that almost everyone on earth can read and understand without needing a translation in the first place. Why the fuck do people need to bring LLMs where it's not needed ? Is it to pump their NVDA stocks?

2
Empricornreply
feddit.nl

For your example, maybe. If someone writes 8/3/2012, you don't know which is month/day. And if they shorten it to 08/03/12 you literally can't even conclusively determine the year, much less the month or day...

14
FelixCressreply
lemmy.world

8/3/2012

You do. 8th of Feb in the entire civilised world and possibly 3rd of something in Trumpistan.

-5

That's what we Europeans call a "petty answer to the disgrace that is Amarican military time" (not the be confused with regular Amarican time and dates, which don't allow overflow, as far as I'm aware). The date described above is clearly "the second of March, 2015" or 2015-03-02.

2
lemmy.world

This standard would have probably caught on if they wouldn't have gone and made it backwards.

Objectively you are more likely to need to know the day first, then the month then the year, and when people get lazy they always just leave off the year because it is assumed, but if the year is first you have to say the whole thing or sound stupid.

-10
Kamsaareply
lemmy.world

Depends on the purpose. For documents (especially those on which people work collaboratively over long periods of time) I find YYYY-MM-DD ideal. It spares the issues around day or month first when Europeans and people from the US work together, the document are easy to sort and, if it takes more than a year to complete the project (as is often the case in research) things don't get messy.

6

Run a business? Infuriate and baffle your accountants by insisting to do all business and keep all records according to a lunar calendar.

1

In daily speech you're correct, but the ISO standard isn't meant for daily speech. It's meant for timestamps and archives that can be queried in a systematic manner. In that case, the natural ordering is to narrow down the search by year-month-day.

2
gajareply
lemm.ee

You normally use dates to keep track of a series of stuff for future reference. We read left to right.

Do you want to read 01 or 2013 first? Do you care about the day and month if it's from 13 years ago?

Relevance is made much more apparent in my opinion.

5

Why would I gaf about years? Most of the time I do t even use years for anything and yes I prefer to read day first, month second, year isn’t even necessary depending of the situation

0
lemmings.world

How stupid can you be? What you said is very stupid but I’m sure you can do even more stupid

1

If you write thirteen with the big part first (13), why write dates with the small part first?

1
cronreply
feddit.org

Oh please. What's next? A twelve hour time system with am and pm? Measuring distances in thumbs and other body parts?

20
lemmy.world

Worse: measuring temperatures based on what one guy felt was the coldest it could get in the winter and the hottest his fever would reach.

15

To be fair, "thumb" was only a unit in determinating what stick we could beat our wives with.

2

Imagine a database, or even a folder with multiple years in it. "Payroll_05-01-2025". Now all your files are sorted by month. You would have to scroll through "Payroll_05-08-1988"... etc forever before you reach 2025. And when you do, all of 2025 isn't together. ISO 8601 solves these issues automatically. It's time to adapt to a better system...

8