Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Space as time designator

Expand Messages
  • John Hynes
    ... values will be stored in a single field, though another separator may be chosen with discretion. A space is a popular allowed human readable alternative.
    Message 1 of 29 , Jul 9, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      According to Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601 :

      > An optional "T" is suggested to separate date and time when those
      values will be stored in a single field, though another separator may
      be chosen with discretion. A space is a popular allowed human readable
      alternative.

      and:

      > The standard allows the replacement of T with a space or underscore
      if no misunderstanding arises. This is commonly done for human
      communications. A date/time with timezone like 1981-04-05T14:30-05
      would then be written as 1981-04-05 14:30-05.

      In addition, a number of examples are given using a space where the
      time designator should be. However, according to ISO 8601:2000 sec4.4:

      > The space character shall not be used in the representations.

      sec5.4.1:

      > The character [T] shall be used as time designator to indicate the
      start of the representation of time of the day in date and time
      expressions...
      > NOTE By mutual agreement of the partners in information interchange,
      the character [T] may be omitted in applications where there is no
      risk of confusing a combined date and time of the day representation
      with others defined in this International Standard.

      This does not allow for a space or any other character to be used.

      Has this been changed in :2004?

      John Hynes
    • piebaldconsult
      ... Nope.
      Message 2 of 29 , Jul 9, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        > Has this been changed in :2004?

        Nope.
      • Michael Deckers
        John Hynes wrote about the separator T betweeeen the date ... Right: a datetime notation such as 1981-04-05 14:30-05 is composed of _two_ ISO8601 notations:
        Message 3 of 29 , Jul 10, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          John Hynes wrote about the separator 'T' betweeeen the date
          and time part of an ISO notation for datetime:

          > According to Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601 :
          >
          > The standard allows the replacement of T with a space or underscore
          > if no misunderstanding arises. This is commonly done for human
          > communications. A date/time with timezone like 1981-04-05T14:30-05
          > would then be written as 1981-04-05 14:30-05.
          >
          > .......................... However, according to ISO 8601:2000 sec4.4:
          >
          > The space character shall not be used in the representations.
          >
          > This does not allow for a space or any other character to be used.
          >
          > Has this been changed in :2004?

          To which question piebaldconsult answered:

          > Nope.

          Right: a datetime notation such as
          1981-04-05 14:30-05
          is composed of _two_ ISO8601 notations: one for date, one for time
          of day. ISO8601 sets rules for each of these tokens; it does not
          set rules on how these tokens may be combined in text. This is
          usually done with intervening white space or punctuation.

          Michael Deckers
        • John Hynes
          ... What are the sections in 2004 which state this? Is the wording exactly the same as 2000? I want to figure out how this misunderstanding arose and get it
          Message 4 of 29 , Jul 10, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "piebaldconsult" <PIEBALDconsult@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > > Has this been changed in :2004?
            >
            > Nope.

            What are the sections in 2004 which state this? Is the wording
            exactly the same as 2000? I want to figure out how this
            misunderstanding arose and get it fixed in Wikipedia.

            John Hynes
          • Pete Forman
            ... The files section for this group on Yahoo! has a summary of differences between ISO8601:2000 and :2004. It is called ISO8601diff.doc I believe that there
            Message 5 of 29 , Jul 10, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              At 2006-07-10 10:41 +0000, John Hynes wrote:
              >--- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "piebaldconsult" <PIEBALDconsult@...>
              >wrote:
              > >
              > > > Has this been changed in :2004?
              > >
              > > Nope.
              >
              >What are the sections in 2004 which state this? Is the wording
              >exactly the same as 2000? I want to figure out how this
              >misunderstanding arose and get it fixed in Wikipedia.

              The files section for this group on Yahoo! has a summary of
              differences between ISO8601:2000 and :2004. It is called ISO8601diff.doc

              I believe that there was a sentence in a draft that did not make it
              into 8601:2004. Try googling for "Unless explicitly allowed the
              space character shall not be used in the representations."

              --
              Pete Forman -./\.- Disclaimer: This post is originated
              WesternGeco -./\.- by myself and does not represent
              pete.forman@... -./\.- the opinion of Schlumberger or
              http://petef.port5.com -./\.- WesternGeco.
            • piebaldconsult
              ... 2000 s section 4.4 says The space character shall not be used in the representations. 2004 s section 3.4.1 says Unless explicitly allowed by this
              Message 6 of 29 , Jul 10, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                > What are the sections in 2004 which state this?

                2000's section 4.4 says
                "
                The space character shall not be used in the representations.
                "

                2004's section 3.4.1 says
                "
                Unless explicitly allowed by this International Standard the
                character "space" shall not be used in the representations.
                "

                and such is never explicitly allowed.

                I do worry that the next iteration will ease things up further, which
                would be bad.

                But do remember that ISO 8601 is intended primarily for computer-to-
                computer information interchange. What Wikipedia is probably
                indicating is that when the intended audience is a lowly human strict
                ISO 8601 compliance may prove unnecessary. -- see the WWDATES group.
              • John Hynes
                ... Thank you. I found a draft containing this text. John Hynes
                Message 7 of 29 , Jul 10, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Pete Forman <pete.forman@...> wrote:
                  > I believe that there was a sentence in a draft that did not make it
                  > into 8601:2004. Try googling for "Unless explicitly allowed the
                  > space character shall not be used in the representations."

                  Thank you. I found a draft containing this text.

                  John Hynes
                • John Hynes
                  ... The article says nothing of the sort. It just states that a space is part of the standard. There are a number of examples of supposedly standard dates
                  Message 8 of 29 , Jul 11, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "piebaldconsult" <PIEBALDconsult@...>
                    wrote:
                    > But do remember that ISO 8601 is intended primarily for computer-to-
                    > computer information interchange. What Wikipedia is probably
                    > indicating is that when the intended audience is a lowly human strict
                    > ISO 8601 compliance may prove unnecessary. -- see the WWDATES group.

                    The article says nothing of the sort. It just states that a space is
                    part of the standard. There are a number of examples of supposedly
                    standard dates with times, separated by spaces.

                    Anybody can create or edit an article on Wikipedia. Most editors are
                    not experts. Errors on Wikipedia have become major news stories.
                    Some articles have many knowledgeable contributors and are very
                    well-written and accurate, but many others are not. Disputes are
                    common place, and one must often prove ones case for making a change.

                    I have fixed the issue of time designator, but someone else may revert
                    my changes. I have also not checked the article for other errors. If
                    anybody here is interested in this very popular encyclopedia
                    containing accurate information about ISO 8601, I suggest that you
                    check out the article yourself, and change it as appropriate.

                    John Hynes
                    2006-07-11T08:35:05Z
                  • piebaldconsult
                    ... OK, I just read it, it s horrible. Many incorrect statements, too many to correct. There is no substitute for reading the actual standard. Perhaps we
                    Message 9 of 29 , Jul 11, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > The article says nothing of the sort.

                      OK, I just read it, it's horrible. Many incorrect statements, too many
                      to correct.

                      There is no substitute for reading the actual standard.

                      Perhaps we should add an "external link" to here? There isn't even a
                      link to the 2000 version.
                    • Vincent Lefevre
                      ... Yep, but this is not specific to the ISO 8601 standard. If you want to know what a standard says, read the standard. For instance, this is particularly
                      Message 10 of 29 , Jul 11, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On 2006-07-11 16:06:53 -0000, piebaldconsult wrote:
                        > OK, I just read it, it's horrible. Many incorrect statements, too many
                        > to correct.
                        >
                        > There is no substitute for reading the actual standard.

                        Yep, but this is not specific to the ISO 8601 standard. If you want
                        to know what a standard says, read the standard. For instance, this
                        is particularly true for the ISO C standard, for which the K&R book
                        (latest edition) is inaccurate or completely wrong in several places.

                        --
                        Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@...> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
                        100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
                        Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
                      • John Hynes
                        ... I disagree that there are too many to correct. They are all correctable. The article isn t even that long, as Wikipedia goes. Perhaps if you listed the
                        Message 11 of 29 , Jul 12, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "piebaldconsult" <PIEBALDconsult@...>
                          wrote:
                          > OK, I just read it, it's horrible. Many incorrect statements, too many
                          > to correct.

                          I disagree that there are too many to correct. They are all
                          correctable. The article isn't even that long, as Wikipedia goes.
                          Perhaps if you listed the biggest ones you found... What caught my
                          attention right away was the large-print example at the top which had
                          a space between the date and time. (It now has a "T".)

                          > There is no substitute for reading the actual standard.
                          >
                          > Perhaps we should add an "external link" to here? There isn't even a
                          > link to the 2000 version.

                          It would be good if the current standard was online to link to. There
                          have been significant changes since 2000.

                          John Hynes
                        • piebaldconsult
                          ... The thing shouldn t even be as large as it is, it should give just a brief summary and provide links to the actual document. There is also a box farther
                          Message 12 of 29 , Jul 12, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            > I disagree that there are too many to correct. They are all
                            > correctable. The article isn't even that long, as Wikipedia goes.
                            > Perhaps if you listed the biggest ones you found...

                            The thing shouldn't even be as large as it is, it should give just a
                            brief summary and provide links to the actual document.

                            There is also a box farther down that shows "<date>T<time>". When I
                            first looked it also had "<date> <time>", but I saw this little "edit"
                            link and darn well went ahead and fixed it myself!

                            I just made a couple other edits, but I don't want to rewrite it. If it
                            came to that I'd write a new entry just on the 2004 version.

                            > It would be good if the current standard was online to link to. There
                            > have been significant changes since 2000.

                            Which is why ISO shouldn't charge for the darn things! (But there _is_
                            a link to the ISO store.)
                          • John Hynes
                            ... Why not rewrite it? It happens all the time. It appears that you already have rewritten much of the article. I don t think that a new entry would be
                            Message 13 of 29 , Jul 13, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "piebaldconsult" <PIEBALDconsult@...>
                              wrote:
                              > I just made a couple other edits, but I don't want to rewrite it. If it
                              > came to that I'd write a new entry just on the 2004 version.

                              Why not rewrite it? It happens all the time. It appears that you
                              already have rewritten much of the article.

                              I don't think that a new entry would be appropriate; the main article
                              on ISO 8601 should focus on the current version. A history section
                              could be added, stating the changes between editions, or just a
                              section stating changes between 2000 and 2004.

                              John Hynes
                            • John Hynes
                              ... or April 6, 2020. Since two-digit years are not permitted, the latter two are no longer valid. I have removed them from the article. John Hynes
                              Message 14 of 29 , Jul 13, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                I just noticed one you missed. After your edit, the article states:
                                > ...200406 could either mean the year 200406; June 2004; April 6, 20;
                                or April 6, 2020.

                                Since two-digit years are not permitted, the latter two are no longer
                                valid. I have removed them from the article.

                                John Hynes

                                --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "piebaldconsult" <PIEBALDconsult@...>
                                wrote:
                                >
                                > > I disagree that there are too many to correct. They are all
                                > > correctable. The article isn't even that long, as Wikipedia goes.
                                > > Perhaps if you listed the biggest ones you found...
                                >
                                > The thing shouldn't even be as large as it is, it should give just a
                                > brief summary and provide links to the actual document.
                                >
                                > There is also a box farther down that shows "<date>T<time>". When I
                                > first looked it also had "<date> <time>", but I saw this little "edit"
                                > link and darn well went ahead and fixed it myself!
                                >
                                > I just made a couple other edits, but I don't want to rewrite it. If it
                                > came to that I'd write a new entry just on the 2004 version.
                                >
                                > > It would be good if the current standard was online to link to. There
                                > > have been significant changes since 2000.
                                >
                                > Which is why ISO shouldn't charge for the darn things! (But there _is_
                                > a link to the ISO store.)
                                >
                              • Michael Deckers
                                On 2006-07-13, John Hynes wrote, first ... Nor is the former. The ISO 8601 notation 200406 can mean the time of day 20:04:06, but it cannot mean any date.
                                Message 15 of 29 , Jul 13, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On 2006-07-13, John Hynes wrote, first
                                  quoting "piebaldconsult" <PIEBALDconsult@...>:

                                  > > ...200406 could either mean the year 200406; June 2004; April 6, 20;
                                  > > or April 6, 2020.
                                  >
                                  > Since two-digit years are not permitted, the latter two are no longer
                                  > valid. I have removed them from the article.

                                  Nor is the former. The ISO 8601 notation 200406 can mean
                                  the time of day 20:04:06, but it cannot mean any date.
                                  Years with more than 4 digits need a sign (+200406),
                                  and 2004-06 for April of 2004 is in basic format,
                                  in both ISO 8601:2004 and in ISO8601:2000; the hyphens
                                  cannot be omitted.

                                  Michael Deckers
                                • piebaldconsult
                                  ... Good, thanks.
                                  Message 16 of 29 , Jul 13, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    > I just noticed one you missed.

                                    Good, thanks.
                                  • piebaldconsult
                                    ... I suggest others in this group take a look as well, especially you in Texas.
                                    Message 17 of 29 , Jul 13, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      > I have removed them from the article.

                                      I suggest others in this group take a look as well, especially you in
                                      Texas.
                                    • piebaldconsult
                                      ... It would be poor style to put _two_ values in one field, but yes, if you do it s OK. Just remember that the two values with the intervening space or
                                      Message 18 of 29 , Jul 14, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        > Right: a datetime notation such as
                                        > 1981-04-05 14:30-05
                                        > is composed of _two_ ISO8601 notations: one for date, one for time
                                        > of day. ISO8601 sets rules for each of these tokens; it does not
                                        > set rules on how these tokens may be combined in text. This is
                                        > usually done with intervening white space or punctuation.

                                        It would be poor style to put _two_ values in one field, but yes, if
                                        you do it's OK. Just remember that the two values with the intervening
                                        space or whatever _do_not_ form one valid ISO 8601 value.
                                      • piebaldconsult
                                        ... As the section of the entry concerned dates I didn t bother mentioning the possibility of it being a time value. As to whether or not the year 200406
                                        Message 19 of 29 , Jul 14, 2006
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          > Nor is the former. The ISO 8601 notation 200406 can mean
                                          > the time of day 20:04:06, but it cannot mean any date.
                                          > Years with more than 4 digits need a sign (+200406),
                                          > and 2004-06 for April of 2004 is in basic format,
                                          > in both ISO 8601:2004 and in ISO8601:2000; the hyphens
                                          > cannot be omitted.

                                          As the section of the entry concerned dates I didn't bother
                                          mentioning the possibility of it being a time value.

                                          As to whether or not the year 200406 requires a plus sign is up to
                                          interpetation (as mentioned in my document on ambiguities). I left
                                          the statement as it was, because it _could_ be the year 200406.

                                          To reiterate my point, ISO 8601:2004 states in section 3.4.2
                                          (Characters used in place of digits or signs):

                                          "
                                          (plus/minus) represents a plus sign [+] if in combination with the
                                          following element a positive value or zero needs to be represented
                                          (in this case, unless explicitly stated otherwise, the plus sign
                                          shall not be omitted), or a minus sign [-] if in combination with the
                                          following element a negative value needs to be presented.
                                          "

                                          I agree that this pretty much means, "if the year needs to be
                                          represented and is positive, it requires a plus sign", but I would
                                          allow others to interpret it to mean, "if the year needs to be
                                          represented as positive, the plus sign is required". I expect most
                                          people _don't_ think of the year as positive, but as an ordinal
                                          number and doesn't need to be represented as positive. Otherwise, why
                                          not require the plus sign on four-digit years?

                                          Besides, the ambiguity only exists when basic format is used. If you
                                          stick to extended format (as you should), there is no problem.
                                        • John Hynes
                                          ... Unfortunately, this is not what the article stated. It specifically stated that the T designator may be replaced by a space or underscore in combined
                                          Message 20 of 29 , Jul 15, 2006
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "piebaldconsult" <PIEBALDconsult@...>
                                            wrote:
                                            > > Right: a datetime notation such as
                                            > > 1981-04-05 14:30-05
                                            > > is composed of _two_ ISO8601 notations: one for date, one for time
                                            > > of day. ISO8601 sets rules for each of these tokens; it does not
                                            > > set rules on how these tokens may be combined in text. This is
                                            > > usually done with intervening white space or punctuation.
                                            >
                                            > It would be poor style to put _two_ values in one field, but yes, if
                                            > you do it's OK. Just remember that the two values with the intervening
                                            > space or whatever _do_not_ form one valid ISO 8601 value.

                                            Unfortunately, this is not what the article stated. It specifically
                                            stated that the T designator may be replaced by a space or underscore
                                            in combined representations, and gave examples of combined
                                            representations with spaced throughout. (I just found a couple more
                                            and fixed them.)

                                            We could put language stating that the date and time may be
                                            represented in two separate fields, but it should be clear that this
                                            is not a single combined representation, and examples with spaces
                                            should be avoided in the rest of the article.

                                            John Hynes
                                            July 15, 2006-07-15T00:17:00Z
                                          • John Hynes
                                            ... I hit send accidently, before I finished editing the date string. I ll have to make a script. John Hynes 2006-07-16T01:10:32Z
                                            Message 21 of 29 , Jul 15, 2006
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "John Hynes" <john@...> wrote:
                                              > John Hynes
                                              > July 15, 2006-07-15T00:17:00Z

                                              I hit send accidently, before I finished editing the date string.
                                              I'll have to make a script.

                                              John Hynes
                                              2006-07-16T01:10:32Z
                                            • Pete Forman
                                              ... In general there should be three parts: date, time, and zone designator. Leave aside the case of local time where the zone designator is empty. The ZD
                                              Message 22 of 29 , Jul 17, 2006
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                At 2006-07-16 00:16 +0000, John Hynes wrote:
                                                >[....]
                                                >We could put language stating that the date and time may be
                                                >represented in two separate fields, but it should be clear that this
                                                >is not a single combined representation, and examples with spaces
                                                >should be avoided in the rest of the article.

                                                In general there should be three parts: date, time, and zone
                                                designator. Leave aside the case of local time where the zone
                                                designator is empty. The ZD applies to the date and time. The three
                                                parts cannot be treated as separate. A space between date and time
                                                can be treated as an extension to ISO 8601 representing a single
                                                datetime but should not be treated as two ISO 8601 representations.


                                                A related standard of interest is for SQL, ISO/IEC 9075-2 (editions in
                                                1989, 1992, 1999, 2003). The timestamp format is very similar to ISO
                                                8601 extended but it mandates space as the separator between date and
                                                time.

                                                --
                                                Pete Forman -./\.- Disclaimer: This post is originated
                                                WesternGeco -./\.- by myself and does not represent
                                                pete.forman@... -./\.- the opinion of Schlumberger or
                                                http://petef.port5.com -./\.- WesternGeco.
                                              • piebaldconsult
                                                ... Actually only with the time, which is somewhat of a shortcoming of ISO 8601. ... No, it can t. ... I was just trying to get in touch with one of my
                                                Message 23 of 29 , Jul 17, 2006
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  > The ZD applies to the date and time.

                                                  Actually only with the time, which is somewhat of a shortcoming of ISO
                                                  8601.

                                                  > A space between date and time
                                                  > can be treated as an extension to ISO 8601

                                                  No, it can't.

                                                  > A related standard of interest is for SQL, ISO/IEC 9075-2 (editions in
                                                  > 1989, 1992, 1999, 2003). The timestamp format is very similar to ISO
                                                  > 8601 extended but it mandates space as the separator between date and
                                                  > time.

                                                  I was just trying to get in touch with one of my colleagues to ask
                                                  where he got the following quote:

                                                  "The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many of them."
                                                • John Hynes
                                                  ... This does not seem to be supported by the wording of the standard. The the zone designator is used only with time of the day representations or combined
                                                  Message 24 of 29 , Jul 17, 2006
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Pete Forman <pete.forman@...> wrote:
                                                    > In general there should be three parts: date, time, and zone
                                                    > designator. Leave aside the case of local time where the zone
                                                    > designator is empty. The ZD applies to the date and time. The three
                                                    > parts cannot be treated as separate. A space between date and time
                                                    > can be treated as an extension to ISO 8601 representing a single
                                                    > datetime but should not be treated as two ISO 8601 representations.

                                                    This does not seem to be supported by the wording of the standard.
                                                    The the zone designator is used only with time of the day
                                                    representations or combined representations. There is no zone
                                                    designator with date-only representations. Also, spaces are
                                                    explicitly prohibited, so if the date and time are separated by a
                                                    space, then they are separate representations. The standard is very
                                                    explicit that there are date repesentations, time representations and
                                                    combined representations, and that the zone designator is a part of
                                                    the latter two, not a separate representation.

                                                    > A related standard of interest is for SQL, ISO/IEC 9075-2 (editions in
                                                    > 1989, 1992, 1999, 2003). The timestamp format is very similar to ISO
                                                    > 8601 extended but it mandates space as the separator between date and
                                                    > time.

                                                    Which is a different standard, so what it states does not apply
                                                    necessarily to ISO 8601, which clearly states, "The space character
                                                    shall not be used in the representations."
                                                  • Tex Texin
                                                    I agree with John. tex _____ From: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ISO8601@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Hynes Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:44 PM To:
                                                    Message 25 of 29 , Jul 18, 2006
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      I agree with John.
                                                      tex


                                                      From: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ISO8601@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Hynes
                                                      Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:44 PM
                                                      To: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com
                                                      Subject: [ISO8601] Re: Space as time designator

                                                      --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups .com, Pete Forman <pete.forman@ ...> wrote:

                                                      > In general there should be
                                                      three parts: date, time, and zone
                                                      > designator. Leave aside the case of
                                                      local time where the zone
                                                      > designator is empty. The ZD applies to the
                                                      date and time. The three
                                                      > parts cannot be treated as separate. A space
                                                      between date and time
                                                      > can be treated as an extension to ISO 8601
                                                      representing a single
                                                      > datetime but should not be treated as two ISO 8601
                                                      representations.

                                                      This does not seem to be supported by the wording of the standard.
                                                      The the zone designator is used only with time of the day
                                                      representations or combined representations. There is no zone
                                                      designator with date-only representations. Also, spaces are
                                                      explicitly prohibited, so if the date and time are separated by a
                                                      space, then they are separate representations. The standard is very
                                                      explicit that there are date repesentations, time representations and
                                                      combined representations, and that the zone designator is a part of
                                                      the latter two, not a separate representation.

                                                      > A related
                                                      standard of interest is for SQL, ISO/IEC 9075-2 (editions in
                                                      > 1989, 1992,
                                                      1999, 2003). The timestamp format is very similar to ISO
                                                      > 8601 extended
                                                      but it mandates space as the separator between date and
                                                      >
                                                      time.

                                                      Which is a different standard, so what it states does not apply
                                                      necessarily to ISO 8601, which clearly states, "The space character
                                                      shall not be used in the representations. "

                                                    • piebaldconsult
                                                      ... in ... ISO ... and ... Ah, here s the quote, I found it on http://www.sysprog.net/quotes.html The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of
                                                      Message 26 of 29 , Jul 19, 2006
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        > > A related standard of interest is for SQL, ISO/IEC 9075-2 (editions
                                                        in
                                                        > > 1989, 1992, 1999, 2003). The timestamp format is very similar to
                                                        ISO
                                                        > > 8601 extended but it mandates space as the separator between date
                                                        and
                                                        > > time.

                                                        Ah, here's the quote, I found it on http://www.sysprog.net/quotes.html

                                                        "
                                                        The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to
                                                        choose from. (Andrew Tannenbaum)
                                                        "
                                                      • Fred Bone
                                                        ... Yes, it s in his Computer Networks . It continues something like And if you don t like what s on offer this year, just wait and there ll be more along
                                                        Message 27 of 29 , Jul 19, 2006
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          piebaldconsult said:

                                                          > Ah, here's the quote, I found it on http://www.sysprog.net/quotes.html
                                                          >
                                                          > "
                                                          > The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to
                                                          > choose from. (Andrew Tannenbaum)
                                                          > "

                                                          Yes, it's in his "Computer Networks". It continues something like "And if
                                                          you don't like what's on offer this year, just wait and there'll be more
                                                          along next year"; except I can't find it to be sure of the words ...
                                                        • Fred Bone
                                                          ... Found it, of course, next time I went to the book: The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose from; furthermore, if you do not like
                                                          Message 28 of 29 , Jul 19, 2006
                                                          • 0 Attachment
                                                            I said:

                                                            > piebaldconsult said:
                                                            >
                                                            > > Ah, here's the quote, I found it on http://www.sysprog.net/quotes.html
                                                            > >
                                                            > > "
                                                            > > The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to
                                                            > > choose from. (Andrew Tannenbaum) "
                                                            >
                                                            > Yes, it's in his "Computer Networks". It continues something like "And if
                                                            > you don't like what's on offer this year, just wait and there'll be more
                                                            > along next year"; except I can't find it to be sure of the words ...

                                                            Found it, of course, next time I went to the book:
                                                            "The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose from;
                                                            furthermore, if you do not like any of them, you can just wait for next
                                                            year's model." - Andrew S Tanenbaum, "Computer Networks", ch. 4.

                                                            (Note the spelling of his name, btw).

                                                            He was talking about the development (if that's the word) of SNA into
                                                            ADCCP, HDLC, LAP and LAP-B.
                                                          • piebaldconsult
                                                            Good, thanks. The point is that if you don t follow ISO 8601 (or any other standard) exactly then you simply aren t following the standard. Almost compliant
                                                            Message 29 of 29 , Jul 19, 2006
                                                            • 0 Attachment
                                                              Good, thanks.

                                                              The point is that if you don't follow ISO 8601 (or any other standard)
                                                              exactly then you simply aren't following the standard. "Almost
                                                              compliant" just won't cut it.

                                                              See what the W3C did, they created their own standard which
                                                              is "inspired" by ISO 8601. (And avoids a lot of trouble in the process.)

                                                              ISO 8601 is a good standard by which to be inspired, but maybe the ISO
                                                              can now be inspired by the W3C.
                                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.