Perfect date
-
I’m now imagining a child who must write
2026-05-10T10:06:09.426792Zon all of their tests.It's a flexible standard.
2026-05-10T10:06:09.426792Z,2026-05-10 10:06:09.426792Z,2026-05-10 10:06:09.426792, and2026-05-10all conform to the standard. -
MM/DD/YY for me.
Edit: I learned something new today.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Same here buddy. It's what I use every day. Welcome to Lemmy, apparently being American is unwelcome around here.
Oh also. Windows, OneDrive and Google really russles some jimmies round here.
-
YYYYMMDDHHMMSS is the only acceptable format.
ISO 8601 is clearly much superior due to being delimited.
-
I'm the only one annoyed about DD/MM/YYYY not being a date, but a date "format"?
Not only it's a recycled joke, it doesn't even make sense.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]DD/MM/YYYY or YYYY-MM-DD are formatting conventions for expressing dates. The date itself is probably converted from some date object anyway, like the Unix Epoch, and can be expressed in any variety of formats.Wednesday, June 11, 2025 is a date.dddd, mmm dd, yyyyor%A, %B %d, %Yis a format.Edit: I’m pretty sure I misread the comment above.
-
I thought that was unix time /s
No, it's a unix directory structure
-
They did; the
Zat the end denotes UTC.wrote on last edited by [email protected]My point was not everyone is just at UTC zero but sure Z is also a timezone.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Heretic!
YYYY.MM.DD is the correct format.
-
This post did not contain any content.
This is stupid AF.
YYYY/MM/DD
This is the best choice.
-
For computing or sorting purposes, YYYY-MM-DD is best. But in day to day writing a date, I prefer DD-MON-YYYY.
I'm sorry that you're wrong... What a bummer.
-
ISO 8601 is clearly much superior due to being delimited.
ISO is paywalled therefore inferior than the free RFC.
-
I mean slashes
/instead of colons.That’s not a colon. Both are commonly in use in Europe. USA just switched the d/m
-
This post did not contain any content.
l jS F Y
-
YYYYMMDDHHMMSS is the only acceptable format.
Nope, it clearly should be mmsshhMMDDYYYY
-
This post did not contain any content.
For consistency, Americans should adopt mm:ss.hh MM-DD-YYYY.
-
If you use DD/MM/YYYY then logically you should also use ss:mm:hh
No, because in most cases the most important information about a date is the day, then month, then year. It also matches the way we read dates. For the time it's typically the hour, then minutes, then seconds. YYYY/MM/DD is better when naming files, but in UIs I much prefer DD/MM/YYYY, it's just more natural to the way we read.
-
Heretic!
YYYY.MM.DD is the correct format.
small correction: YYYY-MM-DD to avoid common special meanings chars
-
This is stupid AF.
YYYY/MM/DD
This is the best choice.
/isn't a valid char in filenames, yyyy-mm-dd is better -
This post did not contain any content.
rfc3339 my beloved
-
Waiting for the ISO 8601 & 9001 gang to show up and promote YYYY-MM-DD.
Edit: That took seconds, a very punctual bunch.
-
For consistency, Americans should adopt mm:ss.hh MM-DD-YYYY.
For consistency, Europeans should adopt ss:mm:hh DD-MM-YYYY.
See how ridiculous that is? ISO8601 or GTFO
