Re:ISO 8601: a better date format
by lurquer on Friday February 26, 2021 @03:49AM
(#26272680)
> it is almost immune from confusion because (hopefully) nobody is insane enough to expect YYYY-DD-MM. YYYY-MM-DD both satisfies the American intuitive expectation of month coming before day,
I disagree. (Or, perhaps I’m insane...)
I paused when coming across the ANSI version in the article as I couldn’t tell whether it was YYYY-MM-DD or YYYY-DD-MM.
I thought there was a typo or something.
I’ve nothing against the standard, but as Americans have no ‘intuitive’ reason to sort the fields by significance, it is natural for some to incorrectly assume the ANSI version is just the American version written backwards.
I disagree. (Or, perhaps I’m insane...) I paused when coming across the ANSI version in the article as I couldn’t tell whether it was YYYY-MM-DD or YYYY-DD-MM. I thought there was a typo or something.
I’ve nothing against the standard, but as Americans have no ‘intuitive’ reason to sort the fields by significance, it is natural for some to incorrectly assume the ANSI version is just the American version written backwards.