qaz to Mildly InfuriatingEnglish • 10 months agoThe document specifying the usage of ISO8601 doesn't use ISO8601imagemessage-square9arrow-up1211arrow-down114
arrow-up1197arrow-down1imageThe document specifying the usage of ISO8601 doesn't use ISO8601qaz to Mildly InfuriatingEnglish • 10 months agomessage-square9
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish3•10 months agoJust chiming in to say fuck ISO, all my homies use rfc (In this case rfc 3339)
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish7•10 months agoThey aren’t open standards like rfc, you have to pay to access them: https://www.iso.org/store.html It’s similar to the UN in membership, and in my opinion the member states should pay to allow the standards to be open
minus-square@ziklinkEnglish6•edit-210 months agoISO uses a weird separator ‘T’ between the time and the date. eg. 2018-04-01T15:20:15.000-0700 RFC3339 can have a space instead which is a bit more readable: eg. 2020-12-09 16:09:53+00:00
Just chiming in to say fuck ISO, all my homies use rfc
(In this case rfc 3339)
what’s wrong with ISO?
They aren’t open standards like rfc, you have to pay to access them:
https://www.iso.org/store.html
It’s similar to the UN in membership, and in my opinion the member states should pay to allow the standards to be open
ISO uses a weird separator ‘T’ between the time and the date. eg. 2018-04-01T15:20:15.000-0700
RFC3339 can have a space instead which is a bit more readable: eg. 2020-12-09 16:09:53+00:00