ISO not withstanding, its still confusing if only because other cultures use yyddmm. If the IETF website used something like ISO-2010-01-02 maybe.
This format is less confusing: 02jan2010 --bill On 13March2010Saturday, at 7:06, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > > On Mar 13, 2010, at 9:51 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote: > >> >> I just got abused by someone reading the IESG web pages and pointing out >> dates like 2010-01-02 , are confusing. Is there a better way to do dates >> that we should be using on the ietf.org web pages? >> >> > > I would disagree. This follows an ISO standard, ISO 8601, and also happens to > sort properly (in time order). > > From http://www.iso.org/iso/date_and_time_format > > ISO 8601 advises numeric representation of dates and times on an > internationally agreed basis. It represents elements from the largest to the > smallest element: year-month-day: > • Calendar date is the most common date representation. It is: > YYYY-MM-DD > > where YYYY is the year in the Gregorian calendar, MM is the month of the year > between 01 (January) and 12 (December), and DD is the day of the month > between 01 and 31. > > Example: 2003-04-01 represents the first day of April in 2003. > > > > So, 2010-01-02 is January 2, 2010. > > > > Regards > > Marshall > > > >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf mailing list >> Ietf@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf >> > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
