On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 08:33:04AM +0200, Andrius Merkys wrote: > > But, donno, this RFC 5322 is barely parseable by eye, even though this > > is how we typically put dates in Debian (you get this via 'date -R'). > > Much more readable though would be `date --rfc-3339=date` > > I would also vote for RFC 3339. RFC 5322 admittedly removes some > ambiguity (as confusing YYYY-MM-DD for YYYY-DD-MM), but is not so easy > to read/write. RFC 3339 is also widely used in Debian, for example, for > appending timestamps to source package versions and package diff files [1]. > > > Registry: > > - Name: OMICtools > > Entry: OMICS_33677 > > - Name: conda:bioconda > > Entry: NA > > Checked: 2021-03-05 > > - Name: guix > > Entry: pigx-rnaseq > > - Name: bio.tools > > Entry: NA > > Checked: 2021-03-05 > > > > but do our American friends understand that this is not May? And we do > > not need the time, as in > > > > 2021-03-05 20:14:12+01:00
Hi Andrius, Just commenting on the date format part of the thread. Perhaps I am not representative because I work in the computer field, but I don't find the RFC 3339 confusing, nor do I think most other Americans would. I can't recall seeing YYYY-DD-MM used very often, if ever - it seems ambiguous - and RFC 3339 is prevalent in the workplace. I believe Americans are accustomed to either: MM/DD/YYYY, often with a 2-digit year - i.e. MM/DD/YY or YYYY-MM-DD Cheers, tony
