On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 00:08:06 +0200 Alexander Teinum <atei...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For timestamps that must be both human-readable and machine-readable, I > > just told you: YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss-tz:tz (the fractional-second > > timezone should be optional). (That paragraph wasn't entirely a > > joke.) > > Sorry, I misinterpreted what you wrote (“last standard that we’ll ever > need” – the meaning of that and the rest of that paragraph did > actually get swapped around in my head. ;) “That paragraph” was referring to my second paragraph, and that really is my favorite (to use, read, etc.) of the ISO 8601 formats. I'm not such a fan of the formats involving week-of-year, day-of-week, week-of-month, fortnight-of-Mercury-year, etc.. (OK, fortnight-of-Mercury-year is supposed to be a joke.) > I did some research about different formats when working on some other > calendar project this spring, and I arrived at the conclusion that all > should switch to ISO 8601. s/ISO 8601/a big-endian date format/ I do believe they put *every* big-endian date format in there. > But I feel that it’s more sane than not to > drop the number of seconds from flo’s output, since it will always be > 00. Definitely. If you know you won't need a component of the format, drop it before someone starts using it and relying on its presence. Robert Ransom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
