qaz@lemmy.world to Mildly Infuriating@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 months agoThe document specifying the usage of ISO8601 doesn't use ISO8601lemmy.worldimagemessage-square9fedilinkarrow-up1211arrow-down114
arrow-up1197arrow-down1imageThe document specifying the usage of ISO8601 doesn't use ISO8601lemmy.worldqaz@lemmy.world to Mildly Infuriating@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 months agomessage-square9fedilink
minus-squareanemoia_one@lemmynsfw.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·4 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-squarezik@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7arrow-down1·edit-24 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
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