3 ms·
I omitted this detail on purpose to not distract the reader who doesn't know much about date formats.
by kirbykevinson 6y ago
I omitted this detail on purpose to not distract the reader who doesn't know much about date formats.
- eesmith 6y agoHow would you describe the accuracy and veracity of > "Here there’s only one correct way to write a date," given that there are multiple correct ways, and the way shown wasn't actually ISO 8601 but RFC 3339?
- kirbykevinson 6y agoYes, technically there are some edge cases where you can write things differently (apart from what you mentioned, one is, for example, writing the UTC time zone by Z vs +00:00 and another is adding additional precision to the date), but for the end user it's basically the same. Let's not ruin the illusion here :)
- eesmith 6y agoThere's nothing wrong with leading with something like: ISO 8601 is a complex specification because of the many different ways to describe times, dates and duration. Don't let that complexity throw you off! The ISO 8601 timestamp format is clean and elegant. These examples will use the widely used ISO 8601 profile known as RFC 3339, which I'll refer to simply as "ISO 8601". No need for an illusion when synecdoche works.