this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
443 points (86.5% liked)

memes

15487 readers
1 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Noite_Etion@lemmy.world 273 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (18 children)

Waiting for the ISO 8601 & 9001 gang to show up and promote YYYY-MM-DD.

Edit: That took seconds, a very punctual bunch.

[–] Voyajer@lemmy.world 97 points 5 days ago (1 children)
[–] Bahnd@lemmy.world 15 points 5 days ago

Whoo! ISO-8601 fan club!

[–] NJSpradlin@lemmy.world 44 points 5 days ago (2 children)

YYYYMMDD, scrub out the excess fat!

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)
[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 20 points 5 days ago (1 children)
[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 12 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I know. I started using the format with periods back in the 90s, before I knew of the standard, and at this point doing it with periods is muscle memory. That's not meant as an excuse, just an explanation. The excuse is laziness.

[–] Artyom@lemm.ee 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If only there were some international standards organization to make a decision for us!

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 41 points 5 days ago

That's ... why I'm here

[–] kata1yst@sh.itjust.works 39 points 5 days ago (2 children)

RFC 3339 if you please. Let's be prescriptive.

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago (2 children)

After all the self-important blowhards in the committe were satisified that they had put their fingerprint on the ISO8601 document with bullshit like "year-month-week" format support and signed off, they went home.

The rest stayed behind, waited a few minutes to be safe, and then quickly made RFC3339 like a proper standard.

This is what RFC3339 vs ISO8601 feels like.

[–] kata1yst@sh.itjust.works 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

Let's not forget that technically you have to pay for ISO8601, despite it being nearly useless as a standard because it allows several incompatible formats to coexist.

Fucking wild.

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

While a fucking stupid concept, it's nice that this particular format has a monetary deterrent.

[–] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 1 points 4 days ago

Only if you want to say you have the certification for it, you can use it if you want, that is fine

[–] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 2 points 4 days ago

ISO8601 is YYYY-MM-DD nothing to do with weeks and isn;t the only difference of RFC3339 that you can use a space instead of a T in between the date and time? Also RFC3339 is only an internet standard while ISO is a generally international standard?

[–] tisktisk@piefed.social 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Anyone help enlighten me about whatever this and unix epoch are getting at? Are these really more specific/better than iso 8601 and why specifically?

[–] kata1yst@sh.itjust.works 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Happily!

So, first epoch time. It's a pretty robust standard, covers many use cases, has few edge cases... but it's specifically for machine usage, since it's not human readable and it's not reversible into the past (pre-1970).

ISO 8601 (depending on the annum), by the text of the documentation, these are all valid dates:

  • 2007-04-05T14:30
  • 2007-04-05T12:30−02:00
  • 2007-04-05T14:30Z
  • 200704051430
  • 07-04-05T14:30
  • 2007-95T14:30

Etc.

RFC 3339 (& RFC 9557, it's newest modification) is actually a subset of ISO 8601 and is far more prescriptive. For example you must have a timezone designator. You must have a separator between the date and time. You must use a dash between date elements and a colon between time elements. You can easily add standardized subseconds.

  • 2007-04-05T12:30−02:00
  • 2007-04-05 14:30Z

This means that RFC 3339 is much easier to parse and use by both machines and humans.

This page (reddit, I know...) has a great summary, and so in the interest of knowledge and attribution I'll link it: https://www.reddit.com/r/ISO8601/comments/p572xy/rfc_3339_versus_iso_8601/

This website allows you to more directly compare the two interactively. https://ijmacd.github.io/rfc3339-iso8601/

[–] tisktisk@piefed.social 4 points 4 days ago

This is delicious, and I can't say thank you enough. I like this a lot. If anyone has any insight on more superior standards or subsets of these, please inform me. This made my day tho 😊

[–] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 1 points 4 days ago

ISO is a wider standard than the RFC standards though which is only for the internet

[–] vinnymac@lemmy.world 30 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I’m now imagining a child who must write 2026-05-10T10:06:09.426792Z on all of their tests.

[–] littleonescared@lemmy.world 23 points 5 days ago (2 children)

They should also add a timezone since most of us don't live at UTC zero timezones -> 2012-12-28T18:12:33+09:00

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 30 points 5 days ago (1 children)

They did; the Z at the end denotes UTC.

[–] littleonescared@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

My point was not everyone is just at UTC zero but sure Z is also a timezone.

[–] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 1 points 4 days ago

Most people communicate mostly with people in the same timezone's, partially because most countries only have one timezone.

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago

Microsecond precision is fine for most use cases, but I teach my kids to use nanoseconds.

[–] Artyom@lemm.ee 2 points 4 days ago

It's a flexible standard. 2026-05-10T10:06:09.426792Z, 2026-05-10 10:06:09.426792Z,2026-05-1010:06:09.426792, and 2026-05-10 all conform to the standard.

[–] trijste@lemmy.ca 12 points 4 days ago
[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 5 days ago

ISO 8601/RFC-3339 (Unix Epoch also acceptable) gang reporting in.

[–] amlor@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago

I’m doing my part!

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago

It's the only way that makes sense

[–] double_quack@lemm.ee 5 points 5 days ago

YYYY-MM-... well, ya know the deal...

[–] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 5 points 5 days ago

Hello from Hungary ! We should also democratize the Surname GivenName format

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Anyone that gives me a document or receipt or invoice with a date formatted DD-MM-YYYY should have a tire iron swung at their thighs

Multiple swings if they can't decide on using DD-MM-YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY or DD-MM-YY or MM-DD-YY or YY-MM-DD or YY-DD-MM

[–] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 2 points 4 days ago

I rather have somebody write their invoices at DD-MM-YYYY cause there is a bigger chance it will most likely not be an invoice from a North American company which notriously cannot make proper invoices and most software that actually scans and processes invoices is based on the European standaard DD-MM-YYYY or on ISO8601.

[–] tisktisk@piefed.social 3 points 5 days ago (2 children)

As a big ISO 8601 guy myself, I request explanation of this 9001 addition? Never heard of it till now and am optimistic

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 5 days ago

Seconded. Not coming up with much when trying to find out more about it.

Quality Management Systems, unsure what it has to do with 8601, but guess the fanboy venn diagram overlaps

[–] nomecks@lemmy.wtf -4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

DD-MM-YYYY-HH-MM-SS

Makes no sense!

[–] BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I prefer the alphabetical date format DD-HH-MM-SS-mm-yy for maximum confusion

[–] tisktisk@piefed.social 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Were you mostly joking or is there a utility to this? Genuinely curious as someone that finds confusing things slightly more memorable in a really backwards way

[–] BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca 5 points 4 days ago

Yes I was joking, get a random timestamp in this format and you have no idea what it's referring to.

DD:HH:MM:SS:mm:yy is even better because it could be a MAC address.