Talk:ISO 8601

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Time (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Wikipedia dates[edit]

Some people have proposed using ISO 8601 for Wikipedia dates. For more of this discussion, see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers).

-- (unsigned) 2003-03-01T12:06:42‎ MartinHarper

It appears that it's rapidly becoming a de facto standard (if not yet de jure) at least for dates in Wikipedia citations.
-- (unsigned) 2014-02-11T22:05:46‎ 67.52.192.26

Standard Date[edit]

You can use quite a couple templates, in the YYYY-MM-DD date format


{{date|2=ISO}} or {{ISO date}} could be used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.31.29.4 (talkcontribs) 00:47, 10 November 2018 UTC (UTC)

Why the ISO8601 does not allow three letter strings for month?[edit]

Does anyone have any insight or suggestions on the logic behind why the ISO 8601 does not permit to write three letter abbreviations for months, i.e. 2020-APR-14 or 2020 Apr 14 instead of 2020-04-14? Is it to be language neutral, have easier data interchange, or for some other reason? This would have seemed to make the date more readable, especially for users accustomed to other date formats like DD.MM.YYYY or MM/DD/YYYY. While the name of the months are indeed different across many languages, the names are often surprisingly quite similar, but more importantly the first three letters are often shared by many languages. Sauer202 (talk) 23:12, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't know if any rational for the decisions was ever published. It occurs to me that many sorting processes that are not specifically designed to work with ISO 8601 will successfully sort the all-numeric format, but would fail if abbreviated names like APR or SEP were allowed. Jc3s5h (talk) 23:25, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
That makes sense. I wrote a note about this in the article under General principles. Sauer202 (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
It is an international standard, so language independence is important. The similarity of names is limited to only some western languages. Enormously many speakers have a language that does not use the Latin alphabet and so the month names are not similar. The lexical sorting is a bonus, created by the logic of ordering from large to small parts. However, describing what the standard does not allow, is not a task for this article. −Woodstone (talk) 12:23, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Would it be useful to define what a day/month/year consist of?[edit]

I was reading this line in Durations :

Thus, "PT36H" could be used as well as "P1DT12H" for representing the same duration. But keep in mind that "PT36H" is not the same as "P1DT12H" when switching from or to Daylight saving time.

And thought "Surely a day is defined as 24 hours and 12 hours is 12 hours, so why would changing daylight savings matter?"

But presumably a day is defined like "the next occasion when the time is greater than current time" ? Meaning 1 day per year is 23 hours long and one is 25.

And then considered months/years, month is the next occasion when the day is the greater (or month number more than 1 different), and a year the next occasion where the month+day are greater.

Seems like it would be useful information to be added to the page. (probably needs to be worded better than that and not just a guess!)

Times: “24” no longer allowed[edit]

In the section “Times” the first bullet point states that the hour component ranges from “00” to “24” (with the caveat that “24” is used in only a particular circumstance).

This was certainly true in ISO 8601:1988 (section 5.3.2) and ISO 8601:2004 (section 4.2.3), and I presume all editions in between. But it is explicitly disallowed in 8601:2019 (section 5.3.2).

Since use of “24” as an hour indicator is explicitly disallowed by the most recent edition, and because it is an exceedingly bad idea, I think the bullet-point should be reworded. If people think a nod to the shameful history is important, it should be relegated to a footnote.

And, correspondingly, shortly thereafter, the paragraph starting with “Midnight” needs to be re-written. That is, the article should not say “A or B may be used except if you are using the newest version, in which case only A”, but rather should say “A is used. (Earlier versions allowed B, too.)”.

Moreover, since (the crazy) “24:00” is not being used, midnight is no longer a special case.

Thus perhaps:

Midnight should be referred to as "00:00". (Earlier editions of the standard also permitted "24:00", noting that "2007-04-05T24:00" is the same instant as "2007-04-06T00:00".) The notation "00:00" is used to indicate the very beginning of a calendar day. (see Combined date and time representations below).

Sbauman (talk) 18:48, 5 September 2020 (UTC)