Wow - I never imagined such a rapid response to this question. Thanks.
I've replied with roughly "Yep, they might be a bit confusing but everything
else is worse so that's what we use".
On Mar 13, 2010, at 8:06 AM, 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
Cullen Jennings
For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf