ISO not withstanding, its still confusing if only because other cultures use
yyddmm. If the IETF website used something like ISO-2010-01-02 maybe.
This format is less confusing: 02jan2010
--bill
On 13March2010Saturday, at 7:06, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Mar 13, 2010, at 9:51 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
I just got abused by someone reading the IESG web pages and pointing out
dates like 2010-01-02 , are confusing. Is there a better way to do dates
that we should be using on the ietf.org web pages?
I would disagree. This follows an ISO standard, ISO 8601, and also happens to
sort properly (in time order).
From http://www.iso.org/iso/date_and_time_format
ISO 8601 advises numeric representation of dates and times on an
internationally agreed basis. It represents elements from the largest to the
smallest element: year-month-day:
• Calendar date is the most common date representation. It is:
YYYY-MM-DD
where YYYY is the year in the Gregorian calendar, MM is the month of the year
between 01 (January) and 12 (December), and DD is the day of the month
between 01 and 31.
Example: 2003-04-01 represents the first day of April in 2003.
So, 2010-01-02 is January 2, 2010.
Regards
Marshall
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf