• Lena@gregtech.euOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 hours ago

      It’s sorted by the length of time, so a day is shorter than a month.

    • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      23 hours ago

      That’s an ISO date, and it’s gorgeous. It’s the only way I’ll accept working with dates and timezones, though I’ll make am exception for end-user facing output, and format it according to locale if I’m positive they’re not going to feed into some other app.

  • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    1 day ago

    “Europe”, as if there weren’t several languages in Europe with different date formats per language…

      • htrayl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        1 day ago

        Meh. It’s getting a lot of hate here, but I think it works well in casual short term planning. Context (July) - > precision (15).

        If I want to communicate the day in the current month, I just say the day, no month.

          • tomenzgg@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            No because the year is a super large time; there’s a reason people always say they take a bit to adjust to writing the new year in dates because it’s s long enough period of time that it almost becomes automatic.

            For archiving, sure; most other things, no (logically, ISO-8601 is probably the best for most cases, in general, but I’ll die on the hill that MM-DD-YYYY is better than DD-MM-YYYY).

            • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              the year is a super large time

              Not when you’re old… I’ll be 50 this year, they’re flying by.

            • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              22
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              well either you omit the year, or you start with it

              americans start with the month and end with the year, which is totally wild

              • tomenzgg@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 day ago

                Again, – within most use cases – it really isn’t.

                In your day to day, will you need to know the year of a thing? Probably not; it’s probably with the year you’re currently in.

                Do you need to know the day of the month first? Probably not unless it’s within the current month so you need to know the month first.

                Telling me “22nd” on a paper means nothing if I don’t know what month we’re referring to; and, if I do need to know the year, – well – it’s always at the the of the date so it’s easy to locate rather than parsing the middle of the date, any.

                • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  In your day to day, will you need to know the year of a thing? Probably not; it’s probably with the year you’re currently in.

                  that’s why I said you could omit it. did you read what I wrote?

              • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 day ago

                Everyone starts sentences with a capital letter, you shouldn’t be flinging shit mate 😂

            • Mac@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              23 hours ago

              Exactly. It would be like reading the minute of the clock before the hour.

  • Bo7a@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I don’t know why anyone would ever argue against this. Least precise to most precise. Like every other number we use.

    (I don’t know if this is true for EVERY numerical measure, but I’m sure someone will let me know of one that doesn’t)

    • endeavor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      24 hours ago

      They are all equally prescise. American one is stupid just like their stupid ass imperial units. European one is two systems slapped together(since they are rarely used together and when they are its the iso format) and iso is what european standard should be.

      • Bo7a@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        24 hours ago

        You misunderstand my comment.

        I’m saying the digits in a date should be printed in an order dictated by which units give the most precision.

        A year is the least precise, a month is the next least, followed by day, hour, minute, second, millisecond.

        • millie@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          22 hours ago

          Sorting with either the month or the day ahead of the year results in more immediately relevant identifiable information being displayed first. The year doesn’t change very often, so it’s not something you necessarily need to scan past for every entry. The hour changes so frequently as to be irrelevant in many cases. Both the month and the day represent a more useful range of time that you might want to see immediately.

          Personally, I find the month first to be more practical because it tells you how relatively recent something is on a scale that actually lasts a while. Going day first means if you’ve got files sorted this way you’re going to have days of the month listed more prominently than months themselves, so the first of January through the first of December will all be closer together then the first and second of January in your list. Impractical.

          Year first makes sense if you’re keeping a list around for multiple years, but the application there is less useful in the short term. It’s probably simpler to just have individual folders for years and then also tack it on after days to make sure it’s not missing.

          Also, like, this format is how physical calendars work assuming you don’t have a whole stack of them sitting in front of you.

    • Amon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      All my homies hate ISO

      Said no-one ever?

      EDIT: thanks for informing me i now retract my position

      • namingthingsiseasy@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Nah, ISO is a shit organization. The biggest issue is that all of their “standards” are blocked behind paywalls and can’t be shared. This creates problems for open source projects that want to implement it because it inherently limits how many people are actually able to look at the standard. Compare to RFC, which always has been free. And not only that, it also has most of the standards that the internet is built upon (like HTTP and TCP, just to name a few).

        Besides that, they happily looked away when members were openly taking bribes from Microsoft during the standardization of OOXML.

        In any case, ISO-8601 is a garbage standard. P1Y is a valid ISO-8601 string. Good luck figuring out what that means. Here’s a more comprehensive page demonstrating just how stupid ISO-8601 is: https://github.com/IJMacD/rfc3339-iso8601

          • derpgon@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Sure, it means something, and the meaning is not stupid. But since it is the same standard, it should be possible to be used to at least somehow represent the same data. Which it doesn’t.

            • groet@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 hours ago

              I think it is reasonable to say: “for all representation of times (points in time, intervals and sets of points or intervals etc) we follow the same standard”.

              The alternative would be using one standard for points in time, another for intervals, another for time differences, another for changes to a timezone, another for …

              • lad@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 hours ago

                The alternative would be

                More reasonable, if you ask me. At least I came to value modularity in programming, maybe with standards it doesn’t work as good, but I don’t see why

                • groet@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  Standards are used to increase interoperability between systems. The more different standards a single system needs the harder it is to interface with other systems. If you have to define a list of 50 standard you use, chances are the other system uses a different standard for at least one of them. Much easier if you rely on only a handful instead

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Mmm US military date and time is fun too.

    DDMMMYYYYHHMM and time zone identifier. So 26JAN20251841Z.

    So much fun.

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Honestly look very readable to me, though I’m not sure on the timezone bit. Maybe they left it out? Ohterwise it’s 26th of January 2025, 18:41

        It’s gonna be problematic when there’s 5 digit years, but other than that it’s… not good, but definitely less ambiguous than any “normally formatted” date where DD <= 12. Is it MM/DD or DD/MM? We’ll never fucking know!

        Of course, YYYY-MM-DD is still the king because it’s both human readable and sortable as a regular string without converting it into a datetime object or anything.

        • jagungal@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          10 hours ago

          All you’d have to do to make it much more readable is separate the time and the year with some kind of separator like a hyphen, slash or dot. Also “Z” is the time zone, denoting UTC (see also military time zones)

          • boonhet@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            Oh, duh. It’s why all my timestamps have Z’s in the database lmao

            Thing is, you’re right that the separation would help, but this is still way less ambiguous that MM/DD vs DD/MM if you ask me.

  • nesc@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    This pyramid visualisation doesn’t work for me, unless you read time starting with seconds.

    • Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 day ago

      A pyramid is built bottom to top, not top to bottom. That’s also one of the strengths of the ISO format. You can add/remove layers for arbitrary granularity and still have a valid date.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yeah, but people read top to bottom. The best way to do it would be to have upside down pyramids. With the biggest blocks at the top representing the biggest unit of time (YYYY) and the smallest blocks at the bottom representing seconds & smaller.

      • nesc@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 day ago

        I get it, just pyramids are misleading, also year-month-day is better because resulting number always grows. 😺

        • olympicyes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Hold on there pal that time zone is ambiguous. Did you mean 11:40:20 UTC? If so, don’t forget your Z!

          • Zagorath@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            I mean 11:40:20 in what NodaTime would call a “LocalDateTime”. i.e., irrespective of the time zone.

            (And incidentally, if you’re working in C# I strongly recommend the NodaTime library. And even if you’re not, I strongly recommend watching the lectures about dates and times by the NodaTime developer, who demonstrates a way of thinking about dates and times that is so much more thoughtful than what most standard libraries allow for without very careful attention paid by the programmer.)

  • czardestructo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’m almost 40 and now just realizing my insistence on how to structure all my folders and notes is actually an ISO standard. Way to go me.

    • valkyre09@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 day ago

      I stumbled upon it years ago because sorting by name sorts by date. There was no other thought put into it.

      • clockworkrat@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s incredibly annoying that in clinical research we are prohibited from using it because every date must comply with the GCP format (DD mmm yyyy). Every file has the GCP date appended to the end.

  • azi@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Hot take: 2025-Jan-27 is better than 2025-01-27 in monolingual contexts.