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

Re: [ISO8601] Re: Is "2003-11-22 13:30:15" an ISO-8601 date in your opinion?

Expand Messages
  • Budai, Andrew
    ... From: pa_ria To: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com Sent: 2003 11 11 Tuesday 16:28 Subject: [ISO8601] Re: Is 2003-11-22 13:30:15 an ISO-8601 date in your opinion?
    Message 1 of 27 , Nov 12, 2003
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: pa_ria
      Sent: 2003 11 11  Tuesday 16:28
      Subject: [ISO8601] Re: Is "2003-11-22 13:30:15" an ISO-8601 date in your opinion?

      .
      Now: 2003.11.11+07:57:00     < +4089.0065 in my universe... >

      Using the plus sign {date+time} makes more sense,
       as the concept of time is additional to date,
       date logically being the instant a day begins.

      Reserve solidus for denoting spans.

      Avoid hyphen unless you intend to subtract something.

          Since I began to use PC for personal correspondence, and sometimes for teaching business correspondence courses to IT professionals, it is necessary to arrive at a form of the standard that does conform with ISO 8601, yet does not drastically change the routine used in Taiwan and other parts of China. 
      One interesting practice here is to use the ~ [tilde]sign for indicating  from ~ to values.
      It replaces the hyphen in many instances, therefore it cannot be mistaken for a minus sign.
       
          I wonder if someone knows how to adjust my PC settings to that the incoming mail will be dated in a numeric year month day [and perhaps the name of the day] form. 
      On my Microsoft program, the only way I can achieve limited success is if I switch to German, Hungarian or French language setting, but then it will show 
      name of the day day-month-year order, and the name will be not English.
       
          B., A.E.S. — Xinzhu City   Taiwan       2003 11 13 Thursday 00:23 

    • Operations Director
      The tilde is nice, I agree. Thinking about it, it makes more sense than solidus, actually. My universe: Number of posi4seconds
      Message 2 of 27 , Nov 12, 2003
         
        The tilde is nice, I agree.
         Thinking about it, it makes more sense than solidus, actually.
         
        < I wrote reserve, not reverse >
         
        My universe:
        Number of posi4seconds since the Apollo 11 team landed on the moon,
         represented in hexadecimal format. A semi-private thing,
         you can see on my website intro page at the top <a java script clock>
         inspired by my need for a mathematically coherent time system.
         

        Regards,
         Paul Anderson 

         

        http://www.explorecraft.com/

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Adam NGUYEN [mailto:adam917@...]
        Sent: Thursday, 2003 November 13 02:02
        To: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [ISO8601] Re: Is "2003-11-22 13:30:15" an ISO-8601 date in your opinion?

                 Well, I don't seem to agree here with the reverse solidus for timespans for human use. Now, something I would like to note (it has been noted before in the group) is that in Chinese & Japanese, timespans are noted by a tilde (~). Here's an example of a traditional numeric date/time from/to combo in Chinese (and some other Asian languages):

         >..X..< 
                 One thing I wondered about, what is that "< +4089.0065 in my universe... >" correspond to? Is that how many days since you were born or something? To indicate "seconds", you may want to use six decimal places.

        At 2003-11-11 08:28 (UTC +0000), you wrote:
      • Adam NGUYEN
        Go into the Regional/Language settings under Control Panel in your Windows OS, look for the locale English: United Kingdom . Now, look for the Date tab.
        Message 3 of 27 , Nov 12, 2003
                   Go into the Regional/Language settings under Control Panel in your Windows OS, look for the locale "English: United Kingdom". Now, look for the "Date" tab. Change the Short Date value to "yyyy-MM-dd" and if a Separator is mentioned below, choose what you want there. Now, below, under Long Date, you may want any of these this settings:

          yyyy MM dd dddd for 2000 01 01 Saturday
          yyyy MM dd ddd for 2000 01 01 Sat
          yyyy MMMM dd dddd for 2000 January 01 Saturday
          yyyy MMM dd for 2000 Jan 01 Sat
          dddd, d MMMM, yyyy for Saturday, 1 January, 2000 (correct English)
          ddd, dd MMM yyyy for Sat, 01 Jan 2000 (passport format but, with weekday)

                   Things should be correct in every application that asks for date or time.

          At 2003-11-13 00:25 (UTC +0800), you wrote:

           
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: pa_ria
          To: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: 2003 11 11  Tuesday 16:28
          Subject: [ISO8601] Re: Is "2003-11-22 13:30:15" an ISO-8601 date in your opinion?

          .
          Now: 2003.11.11+07:57:00     < +4089.0065 in my universe... >

          Using the plus sign {date+time} makes more sense,
           as the concept of time is additional to date,
           date logically being the instant a day begins.

          Reserve solidus for denoting spans.

          Avoid hyphen unless you intend to subtract something.
              Since I began to use PC for personal correspondence, and sometimes for teaching business correspondence courses to IT professionals, it is necessary to arrive at a form of the standard that does conform with ISO 8601, yet does not drastically change the routine used in Taiwan and other parts of China. 
          One interesting practice here is to use the
          ~ [tilde]sign for indicating  from ~ to values.
          It replaces the hyphen in many instances, therefore it cannot be mistaken for a minus sign.
           
              I wonder if someone knows how to adjust my PC settings to that the incoming mail will be dated in a numeric year month day [and perhaps the name of the day] form. 
          On my Microsoft program, the only way I can achieve limited success is if I switch to German, Hungarian or French language setting, but then it will show
          name of the day day-month-year order, and the name will be not English.
           
              B., A.E.S. — Xinzhu City   Taiwan       2003 11 13 Thursday 00:23
        • NGUYEN Adam
          If you use the Hungarian setting, you ll get a long date in year-month-day order and I believe a weekday after the actual date. I think the exact format is
          Message 4 of 27 , Nov 12, 2003
                     If you use the "Hungarian" setting, you'll get a long date in year-month-day order and I believe a weekday after the actual date. I think the exact format is "yyyy MM dd. dddd".

            At 2003-11-13 00:25 (UTC +0800), you wrote:
               I wonder if someone knows how to adjust my PC settings to that the incoming mail will be dated in a numeric year month day [and perhaps the name of the day] form. 
            On my Microsoft program, the only way I can achieve limited success is if I switch to German, Hungarian or French language setting, but then it will show
            name of the day day-month-year order, and the name will be not English.
             
                B., A.E.S. — Xinzhu City   Taiwan       2003 11 13 Thursday 00:23
          • Per Johansson
            ... 8601 date. You could of course consider it an ISO 8601 date followed by an ISO 8601 time, but since the date and time are related it would not be correct.
            Message 5 of 27 , Jan 18, 2004
              --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Jan Boström <jan@s...> wrote:
              > As you state, strictly speaking "2003-11-22 13:30:15" is not an ISO
              8601 date. You could of course consider it an ISO 8601 date followed
              by an ISO 8601 time, but since the date and time are related it would
              not be correct. However, if it is hard to promote the usage of
              "2003-11-22 13:30:15" for human readable dates, it is impossible to
              get people to use "2003-11-22T13:30:15". In Sweden, we do use
              "2003-11-22 13:30:15" a lot, but we never use "2003-11-22T13:30:15".
              >

              Swedish recommendation is and language checking software will usually
              insist on changing colon (:) to point (.), so that part of the
              standard isn't widely accepted yet. The first version of the standard
              from 1972 also used the point. However, as colon is traditionally used
              in English, it's getting more popular here too, standard or not.

              As for the "T", my view is that it is intended for machine data
              exchange, which is what the standard is about anyway, since spaces are
              unwanted. I normally leave it out in documents intended for human reading.

              > IMHO the two weak spots in ISO 8601 is the "T" for separating date
              and time and the "/" for indicating time spans. Of these two, the "T"
              is worse since optically it is closer to the digits then to the other
              separators and therefore the eye does not instantly recognize it as a
              separator. The "/" is a problem since in most other circumstances a
              "/" is used to indicate alternatives (i.e. date and/or time). In dates
              that are primarily intended to be machine-readable, it does not
              matter, but when trying to promote the ISO 8601 format in dates
              intended for human eyes, it certainly is a problem.
              >

              There are locales where "/" indicates a span. I have read inventory
              lists in French language, where a series such as 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9
              was abbreviated as 1-3/6-8/9. I would have written 1, 3-6, 8-9.
            • hjwoudenberg@aol.com
              In a message dated 1/18/2004 6:09:34 AM Central Standard Time, per@johansson.name writes: As you state, strictly speaking 2003-11-22 13:30:15 is not an ISO
              Message 6 of 27 , Jan 19, 2004
                In a message dated 1/18/2004 6:09:34 AM Central Standard Time, per@... writes:
                As you state, strictly speaking "2003-11-22 13:30:15" is not an ISO
                8601 date. You could of course consider it an ISO 8601 date followed
                by an ISO 8601 time, but since the date and time are related it would
                not be correct. However, if it is hard to promote the usage of
                "2003-11-22 13:30:15" for human readable dates, it is impossible to
                get people to use "2003-11-22T13:30:15".
                In Sweden, we do use
                "2003-11-22 13:30:15" a lot, but we never use "2003-11-22T13:30:15".
                >
                Good to hear from Sweden.  I think you are making a good point.  We must seperate B2B for B2C. 
                 
                Herman
              • jusjih
                ... ISO ... would ... It s true. A note under 5.4.1 of ISO 8601 Final Draft dated 2000-12- 15 says that the letter T may be omitted if readily understood. ...
                Message 7 of 27 , Jan 21, 2004
                  --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "Per Johansson" <per@j...> wrote:
                  > --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Jan Boström <jan@s...> wrote:
                  > > As you state, strictly speaking "2003-11-22 13:30:15" is not an
                  ISO
                  > 8601 date. You could of course consider it an ISO 8601 date followed
                  > by an ISO 8601 time, but since the date and time are related it
                  would
                  > not be correct.

                  It's true. A note under 5.4.1 of ISO 8601 Final Draft dated 2000-12-
                  15 says that the letter T may be omitted if readily understood.

                  > As for the "T", my view is that it is intended for machine data
                  > exchange, which is what the standard is about anyway, since spaces
                  are
                  > unwanted. I normally leave it out in documents intended for human
                  reading.

                  Excellent point. Instead of "on 2001-03-25T03:00-05:00" in a complete
                  sentence, I would say "on 25 March 2001 at 03:00-05:00" for now. I
                  prefer British dates in a complete English sentence but ISO 8601 if
                  not in a sentence.

                  > > IMHO the two weak spots in ISO 8601 is the "T" for separating date
                  > and time and the "/" for indicating time spans. Of these two,
                  the "T"
                  > is worse since optically it is closer to the digits then to the
                  other
                  > separators and therefore the eye does not instantly recognize it as
                  a
                  > separator. The "/" is a problem since in most other circumstances a
                  > "/" is used to indicate alternatives (i.e. date and/or time). In
                  dates
                  > that are primarily intended to be machine-readable, it does not
                  > matter, but when trying to promote the ISO 8601 format in dates
                  > intended for human eyes, it certainly is a problem.

                  What's "IMHO"? Humans are not used to "T" or "/" as defined in ISO
                  8601. Its why I recently said of something like "1984-03-24--1989-03-
                  01" and "1989-12-08--" for time-intervals. I use a double hyphen in
                  place of "/".

                  After all, I no longer use YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss or YYYY-MM-
                  DDThh:mm:ss/YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss with "T" or "/" in my web pages
                  except http://www.geocities.com/jusjih/iso8601.html itself.

                  Justin
                • Jan Boström
                  ... In My Humble Opinion I cannot really claim that it is a standard abbreviation so I should probably not use it in newsgroups, sorry. /Jan
                  Message 8 of 27 , Jan 21, 2004
                    > What's "IMHO"?

                    "In My Humble Opinion"

                    I cannot really claim that it is a standard abbreviation so I should probably not use it in newsgroups, sorry.

                    /Jan
                  • Per Johansson
                    ... I didn t even know that. Haven t read the new final draft in detail. ... I was somewhat disappointed to see the first edition of ISO 8601, since the ISO
                    Message 9 of 27 , Jan 21, 2004
                      --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "jusjih" <jus168jih@s...> wrote:
                      > --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "Per Johansson" <per@j...> wrote:
                      > > --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Jan Boström <jan@s...> wrote:
                      > > > As you state, strictly speaking "2003-11-22 13:30:15" is not an
                      > ISO
                      > > 8601 date. You could of course consider it an ISO 8601 date followed
                      > > by an ISO 8601 time, but since the date and time are related it
                      > would
                      > > not be correct.
                      >
                      > It's true. A note under 5.4.1 of ISO 8601 Final Draft dated 2000-12-
                      > 15 says that the letter T may be omitted if readily understood.
                      >


                      I didn't even know that. Haven't read the new final draft in detail.


                      > > As for the "T", my view is that it is intended for machine data
                      > > exchange, which is what the standard is about anyway, since spaces
                      > are
                      > > unwanted. I normally leave it out in documents intended for human
                      > reading.
                      >
                      > Excellent point. Instead of "on 2001-03-25T03:00-05:00" in a complete
                      > sentence, I would say "on 25 March 2001 at 03:00-05:00" for now. I
                      > prefer British dates in a complete English sentence but ISO 8601 if
                      > not in a sentence.
                      >

                      I was somewhat disappointed to see the first edition of ISO 8601,
                      since the ISO recommendation it replaced, at least in its Swedish
                      version (1972 I think), also had sections describing that kind of
                      human-oriented date representations, such as using month names in
                      textual form. This was excluded in the final standard, as mentioned in
                      its introduction paragraphs.
                    • Per Johansson
                      ... must ... Actually, the part you quoted was me quoting Jan Boström. Many were omitted in my response.
                      Message 10 of 27 , Jan 21, 2004
                        --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, hjwoudenberg@a... wrote:
                        > In a message dated 1/18/2004 6:09:34 AM Central Standard Time,
                        > per@j... writes:
                        > As you state, strictly speaking "2003-11-22 13:30:15" is not an ISO
                        > 8601 date. You could of course consider it an ISO 8601 date followed
                        > by an ISO 8601 time, but since the date and time are related it would
                        > not be correct. However, if it is hard to promote the usage of
                        > "2003-11-22 13:30:15" for human readable dates, it is impossible to
                        > get people to use "2003-11-22T13:30:15". In Sweden, we do use
                        > "2003-11-22 13:30:15" a lot, but we never use "2003-11-22T13:30:15".
                        > >
                        > Good to hear from Sweden. I think you are making a good point. We
                        must
                        > seperate B2B for B2C.
                        >

                        Actually, the part you quoted was me quoting Jan Boström. Many ">"
                        were omitted in my response.
                      • NGUYEN Adam
                        The 03:00-05:00 looks pretty confusing to the average reader. Maybe this should be changed to 03:00:00 local time and mention of what location the event
                        Message 11 of 27 , Jan 21, 2004
                                   The '03:00-05:00' looks pretty confusing to the average reader. Maybe this should be changed to '03:00:00 local time' and mention of what location the event happened in or '03:00:00 (UTC+/-xx:yy:zz)'? The latter example is better, as the parenthesis shows that the timezone is extra information and isn't always required. Another method is to just convert all times to UTC and just do something like '...on Saturday, 1 January, 2000, 08:00:00 UTC...' in an essay or '...2000-01-01 (Sat.) 08:00:00 UTC...' in a list (just keep the weekday abbreviation fixed-width (3 characters in English) or something else. Examples are like this:

                          I was born on Tuesday, 18 September, 1985, 03:55:00 UTC.
                          My birth is: 1985-09-18 (Tue.) 03:55:00 UTC

                          (take note of bold part)

                          At 2004-01-21 08:14 (UTC+0000), you wrote:

                          --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "Per Johansson" <per@j...> wrote:
                          > --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Jan Boström <jan@s...> wrote:
                          > > As you state, strictly speaking "2003-11-22 13:30:15" is not an
                          ISO
                          > 8601 date. You could of course consider it an ISO 8601 date followed
                          > by an ISO 8601 time, but since the date and time are related it
                          would
                          > not be correct.

                          It's true. A note under 5.4.1 of ISO 8601 Final Draft dated 2000-12-
                          15 says that the letter T may be omitted if readily understood.

                          > As for the "T", my view is that it is intended for machine data
                          > exchange, which is what the standard is about anyway, since spaces
                          are
                          > unwanted. I normally leave it out in documents intended for human
                          reading.

                          Excellent point. Instead of "on 2001-03-25T03:00-05:00" in a complete
                          sentence, I would say "on 25 March 2001 at 03:00-05:00" for now. I
                          prefer British dates in a complete English sentence but ISO 8601 if
                          not in a sentence.

                          > > IMHO the two weak spots in ISO 8601 is the "T" for separating date
                          > and time and the "/" for indicating time spans. Of these two,
                          the "T"
                          > is worse since optically it is closer to the digits then to the
                          other
                          > separators and therefore the eye does not instantly recognize it as
                          a
                          > separator. The "/" is a problem since in most other circumstances a
                          > "/" is used to indicate alternatives (i.e. date and/or time). In
                          dates
                          > that are primarily intended to be machine-readable, it does not
                          > matter, but when trying to promote the ISO 8601 format in dates
                          > intended for human eyes, it certainly is a problem.

                          What's "IMHO"? Humans are not used to "T" or "/" as defined in ISO
                          8601. Its why I recently said of something like "1984-03-24--1989-03-
                          01" and "1989-12-08--" for time-intervals. I use a double hyphen in
                          place of "/".

                          After all, I no longer use YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss or YYYY-MM-
                          DDThh:mm:ss/YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss with "T" or "/" in my web pages
                          except http://www.geocities.com/jusjih/iso8601.html itself.

                          Justin


                           

                          Yahoo! Groups Links

                          To visit your group on the web, go to:
                           http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ISO8601/

                          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                           ISO8601-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                           http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




                          ---
                          Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
                          Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
                          Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 2004-01-08
                        • NGUYEN Adam
                          Do you think you can possibly give examples of what these human-oriented date representations were? Out of just a wild guess, I m guessing something like the
                          Message 12 of 27 , Jan 21, 2004
                            Do you think you can possibly give examples of what these
                            human-oriented date representations were? Out of just a wild guess, I'm
                            guessing something like the following:

                            Saturday, 1 January, 2000
                            2000 January 1 (Saturday)
                            Saturday, January 1, 2000
                            Sat., 01-Jan-2000
                            2000-Jan-01 (Sat.)
                            Sat., Jan-01-2000

                            Correct me if I'm wrong...

                            At 2004-01-21 23:04 (UTC+0000), you wrote:

                            >[...]I was somewhat disappointed to see the first edition of ISO 8601,
                            >since the ISO recommendation it replaced, at least in its Swedish
                            >version (1972 I think), also had sections describing that kind of
                            >human-oriented date representations, such as using month names in
                            >textual form. This was excluded in the final standard, as mentioned in
                            >its introduction paragraphs.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >Yahoo! Groups Links
                            >
                            >To visit your group on the web, go to:
                            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ISO8601/
                            >
                            >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            > ISO8601-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                            >
                            >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                            > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >---
                            >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
                            >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
                            >Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 2004-01-08
                          • Per Johansson
                            ... Actually, I still have a copy of the first page of the Swedish standard, that consisted of four pages only. Here s a summary, partly translated to English:
                            Message 13 of 27 , Jan 22, 2004
                              --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, NGUYEN Adam <adam917@s...> wrote:
                              > Do you think you can possibly give examples of what these
                              > human-oriented date representations were? Out of just a wild guess, I'm
                              > guessing something like the following:
                              >
                              > Saturday, 1 January, 2000
                              > 2000 January 1 (Saturday)
                              > Saturday, January 1, 2000
                              > Sat., 01-Jan-2000
                              > 2000-Jan-01 (Sat.)
                              > Sat., Jan-01-2000
                              >

                              Actually, I still have a copy of the first page of the Swedish
                              standard, that consisted of four pages only. Here's a summary, partly
                              translated to English:

                              Svensk Standard SIS 01 02 11
                              Date: 1972-06-30
                              Writing of calendar dates, times of day and time intervals

                              Based on ISO/R 2014-1970, extended with writing of dates
                              alphanumerically and times.

                              1. Dates

                              1.1 Numeric
                              a) 1972-02-09
                              b) 1972 02 09

                              1.2 Alphanumeric
                              a) den 9 februari 1972
                              b) den 9 feb 1972

                              Abbreviations
                              jan feb mar apr maj jun jul aug sep okt nov dec

                              2. Times

                              2.1 Numeric
                              a) 1972-02-09 kl 08.00
                              b) 1972 02 09 kl 08.00
                              c) 1972-02-09 kl 08.32.15,8
                              d) 1972-02-09-08.00
                              e) 1972 02 09 08.00
                              f) 1972-02-09-08.32.15,8
                              g) 1972 02 09 08.32.15,8

                              (end of my copy)
                            • NGUYEN Adam
                              What s SIS 01 02 11 in the beginning, den in section 1.2, and kl in section 2.1 mean? That . in the times to separate hour, minute, and second values is bound
                              Message 14 of 27 , Jan 22, 2004
                                         What's SIS 01 02 11 in the beginning, den in section 1.2, and kl in section 2.1 mean? That . in the times to separate hour, minute, and second values is bound to confuse many people who aren't native Swedish speakers, especially if the time is just two values (like the 23.59 used instead of 23:59).

                                At 2004-01-22 21:28 (UTC+0000), you wrote:

                                --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, NGUYEN Adam <adam917@s...> wrote:
                                >          Do you think you can possibly give examples of what these
                                > human-oriented date representations were? Out of just a wild guess, I'm
                                > guessing something like the following:
                                >
                                > Saturday, 1 January, 2000
                                > 2000 January 1 (Saturday)
                                > Saturday, January 1, 2000
                                > Sat., 01-Jan-2000
                                > 2000-Jan-01 (Sat.)
                                > Sat., Jan-01-2000
                                >

                                Actually, I still have a copy of the first page of the Swedish
                                standard, that consisted of four pages only. Here's a summary, partly
                                translated to English:

                                Svensk Standard SIS 01 02 11
                                Date: 1972-06-30
                                Writing of calendar dates, times of day and time intervals

                                Based on ISO/R 2014-1970, extended with writing of dates
                                alphanumerically and times.

                                1. Dates

                                1.1 Numeric
                                a) 1972-02-09
                                b) 1972 02 09

                                1.2 Alphanumeric
                                a) den 9 februari 1972
                                b) den 9 feb 1972

                                Abbreviations
                                jan feb mar apr maj jun jul aug sep okt nov dec

                                2. Times

                                2.1 Numeric
                                a) 1972-02-09 kl 08.00
                                b) 1972 02 09 kl 08.00
                                c) 1972-02-09 kl 08.32.15,8
                                d) 1972-02-09-08.00
                                e) 1972 02 09 08.00
                                f) 1972-02-09-08.32.15,8
                                g) 1972 02 09 08.32.15,8

                                (end of my copy)




                                 

                                Yahoo! Groups Links

                                To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ISO8601/

                                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                 ISO8601-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




                                ---
                                Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
                                Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
                                Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 2004-01-22
                              • Budai, Andrew
                                ... From: Per Johansson To: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com Sent: 2004 January 23, Friday 05:28 Subject: [ISO8601] Re: Is 2003-11-22 13:30:15 an ISO-8601 date in
                                Message 15 of 27 , Jan 22, 2004
                                   
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  Sent: 2004 January 23, Friday  05:28
                                  Subject: [ISO8601] Re: Is "2003-11-22 13:30:15" an ISO-8601 date in your opinion?

                                  --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, NGUYEN Adam <adam917@s...> wrote:
                                  >          Do you think you can possibly give examples of what these
                                  > human-oriented date representations were? Out of just a wild guess, I'm
                                  > guessing something like the following:
                                  >
                                  > Saturday, 1 January, 2000
                                  > 2000 January 1 (Saturday)
                                  > Saturday, January 1, 2000
                                  > Sat., 01-Jan-2000
                                  > 2000-Jan-01 (Sat.)
                                  > Sat., Jan-01-2000
                                  >

                                  Actually, I still have a copy of the first page of the Swedish
                                  standard, that consisted of four pages only. Here's a summary, partly
                                  translated to English:

                                  Svensk Standard SIS 01 02 11
                                  Date: 1972-06-30
                                  Writing of calendar dates, times of day and time intervals

                                  Based on ISO/R 2014-1970, extended with writing of dates
                                  alphanumerically and times.

                                  1. Dates

                                  1.1 Numeric
                                  a) 1972-02-09
                                  b) 1972 02 09

                                  1.2 Alphanumeric
                                  a) den 9 februari 1972
                                  b) den 9 feb 1972

                                  Abbreviations
                                  jan feb mar apr maj jun jul aug sep okt nov dec

                                  2. Times

                                  2.1 Numeric
                                  a) 1972-02-09 kl 08.00
                                  b) 1972 02 09 kl 08.00
                                  c) 1972-02-09 kl 08.32.15,8
                                  d) 1972-02-09-08.00
                                  e) 1972 02 09 08.00
                                  f) 1972-02-09-08.32.15,8
                                  g) 1972 02 09 08.32.15,8

                                  (end of my copy)
                                      As a language instructor, I try to teach simplicity.  I find "Human-oriented Date Representation" a  little too complicated. 
                                  I would say: Date and Time for everyday use.
                                   
                                      Having said this, I would like to make ISO 8601 to be user-friendly for everyday users, like office clerks, shipping agents, lawyers, all non-technical professionals, or even homemakers who use calendars and answering machines in their daily lives.
                                   
                                      I want my 'talking clock' to show 00:30 and say "zero hour thirty", or even "half an hour after midnight" will suffice.
                                   
                                      We've heard from computer programmers who tried to settle the issue on systems talking to each other, then systems talking to people and vice versa.  Now we need  suggestions that give a 'plain English' version of ISO 8601, one that leaves room for personalization. 
                                   
                                      My uncle in Hungary would like to add the name of the day to 2004 01 26  but he would want to be technically correct.  To him, Monday is hétfő, to our Swedish friends it is probably mandag, To the French it is lundi, and to thirteen hundred million Chinese  Monday is xinzhi yi = Day One.
                                   
                                      The standard date should fit into any language, with margin left for expressing the name of the day in parentheses.
                                   
                                      Similarly, mm 01 (month) should be numeric with allowance for the name of the month, as in January -- Janvier -- Jänner -- januar etc to add the human touch.
                                   
                                      Historic year designations, such as year 5000+ for the Jews, 4000+ for the Chinese, yet again different years for the Japanese and the Taiwanese, should be relegated to the history books or to the religious commemorations.  The world-wide standard for yyyy is the current 2004.
                                   
                                      In telling the time, 13:30 should be qualified whether it is GMT, UTC, or what time zone.  Where ever the summer daylight time deviation exists, it should be noted. 
                                   
                                      It is seldom necessary for ordinary people to verbally express seconds, therefore 13:30 can be said in English as "thirteen-thirty" without adding the words "hour" and "minutes" in most cases.  If any doubt, one can add "thirteen-thirty p.m.". 
                                  European languages have already established their own methods of expressing time verbally, so my suggestion aims at standardizing English only.
                                   
                                      We need suggestions as to the writing and saying world standard date and time in English, while adding that other nations should be able to write the correct date and time without having to learn a huge vocabulary of English words.
                                   
                                  Budai, Andrew — Taiwan        2004 01 23 (Friday) 10:19
                                   
                                   
                                   
                                   
                                     
                                • Tex Texin
                                  Guys, These are noble sentiments, but not really iso 8601 related. I understand that you are starting from 8601 as a base, but you are not talking about an
                                  Message 16 of 27 , Jan 22, 2004
                                    Guys,

                                    These are noble sentiments, but not really iso 8601 related.
                                    I understand that you are starting from 8601 as a base, but you are not talking
                                    about an exchange format but a cultural convention to be adopted by
                                    english-speakers and possibly other cultures. (Not to mention the implied
                                    repression of existing conventions some of which are promoted by the relevant
                                    governments in an attempt to preserve their culture.)

                                    I wonder if the discussion would be better served on a new list that was
                                    dedicated to creating an unambiguous but humane date, time format and calendar.
                                    You could then define clear objectives, decide if 8601 is in fact the right
                                    base to begin with, and which parts it makes sense to borrow, whether you want
                                    an international or english format, etc.

                                    You would probably get more interest and support from a list entitled
                                    "unambiguous human-readable date formats" than one called iso8601.

                                    This is not my list, so you can ignore my suggestion or take them with a grain
                                    of salt- I am also not trying to give offense.
                                    But the discussion does seem off-topic and has wandered now far from the
                                    objectives of 8601.

                                    It doesn't seem you are proposing to "fix" 8601 nearly as much as create
                                    something different for a similar but unrelated purpose.

                                    tex

                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: Per Johansson
                                    To: ISO8601@yahoogroups.com
                                    Sent: 2004 January 23, Friday 05:28
                                    Subject: [ISO8601] Re: Is "2003-11-22 13:30:15" an ISO-8601 date in
                                    your opinion?

                                    --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, NGUYEN Adam <adam917@s...> wrote:
                                    > Do you think you can possibly give examples of what these
                                    > human-oriented date representations were? Out of just a wild guess,
                                    I'm
                                    > guessing something like the following:
                                    >
                                    > Saturday, 1 January, 2000
                                    > 2000 January 1 (Saturday)
                                    > Saturday, January 1, 2000
                                    > Sat., 01-Jan-2000
                                    > 2000-Jan-01 (Sat.)
                                    > Sat., Jan-01-2000
                                    >

                                    Actually, I still have a copy of the first page of the Swedish
                                    standard, that consisted of four pages only. Here's a summary, partly
                                    translated to English:

                                    Svensk Standard SIS 01 02 11
                                    Date: 1972-06-30
                                    Writing of calendar dates, times of day and time intervals

                                    Based on ISO/R 2014-1970, extended with writing of dates
                                    alphanumerically and times.

                                    1. Dates

                                    1.1 Numeric
                                    a) 1972-02-09
                                    b) 1972 02 09

                                    1.2 Alphanumeric
                                    a) den 9 februari 1972
                                    b) den 9 feb 1972

                                    Abbreviations
                                    jan feb mar apr maj jun jul aug sep okt nov dec

                                    2. Times

                                    2.1 Numeric
                                    a) 1972-02-09 kl 08.00
                                    b) 1972 02 09 kl 08.00
                                    c) 1972-02-09 kl 08.32.15,8
                                    d) 1972-02-09-08.00
                                    e) 1972 02 09 08.00
                                    f) 1972-02-09-08.32.15,8
                                    g) 1972 02 09 08.32.15,8

                                    (end of my copy)

                                    As a language instructor, I try to teach simplicity. I find
                                    "Human-oriented Date Representation" a little too
                                    complicated.
                                    I would say: Date and Time for everyday use.

                                    Having said this, I would like to make ISO 8601 to be user-friendly
                                    for everyday users, like office clerks, shipping agents,
                                    lawyers, all non-technical professionals, or even homemakers who use
                                    calendars and answering machines in their daily
                                    lives.

                                    I want my 'talking clock' to show 00:30 and say "zero hour thirty",
                                    or even "half an hour after midnight" will suffice.

                                    We've heard from computer programmers who tried to settle the issue
                                    on systems talking to each other, then systems
                                    talking to people and vice versa. Now we need suggestions that give a
                                    'plain English' version of ISO 8601, one that leaves
                                    room for personalization.

                                    My uncle in Hungary would like to add the name of the day to 2004
                                    01 26 but he would want to be technically correct. To him, Monday is hétf?,
                                    to
                                    our Swedish friends it is probably mandag, To the French it is lundi,
                                    and to thirteen hundred million Chinese Monday is xinzhi yi = Day One.

                                    The standard date should fit into any language, with margin left
                                    for expressing the name of the day in parentheses.

                                    Similarly, mm 01 (month) should be numeric with allowance for the
                                    name of the month, as in January -- Janvier -- Jänner -- januar etc to add the
                                    human touch.

                                    Historic year designations, such as year 5000+ for the Jews, 4000+
                                    for the Chinese, yet again different years for the Japanese and the Taiwanese,
                                    should be relegated to the history books or to the religious
                                    commemorations. The world-wide standard for yyyy is the current 2004.

                                    In telling the time, 13:30 should be qualified whether it is GMT,
                                    UTC, or what time zone. Where ever the summer
                                    daylight time deviation exists, it should be noted.

                                    It is seldom necessary for ordinary people to verbally express
                                    seconds, therefore 13:30 can be said in English as "thirteen-thirty" without
                                    adding the
                                    words "hour" and "minutes" in most cases. If any doubt, one can add
                                    "thirteen-thirty p.m.".
                                    European languages have already established their own methods of
                                    expressing time verbally, so my suggestion aims at standardizing English only.

                                    We need suggestions as to the writing and saying world standard
                                    date and time in English, while adding that other
                                    nations should be able to write the correct date and time without
                                    having to learn a huge vocabulary of English words.

                                    Budai, Andrew — Taiwan 2004 01 23 (Friday) 10:19




                                    --
                                    -------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Tex Texin cell: +1 781 789 1898 mailto:Tex@...
                                    Xen Master http://www.i18nGuy.com

                                    XenCraft http://www.XenCraft.com
                                    Making e-Business Work Around the World
                                    -------------------------------------------------------------
                                  • Per Johansson
                                    ... and kl ... used ... This was a national Swedish standard, intended for Swedish-speaking users. A similar standard for, say, Germany, would of course use
                                    Message 17 of 27 , Jan 23, 2004
                                      --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, NGUYEN Adam <adam917@s...> wrote:
                                      > What's SIS 01 02 11 in the beginning, den in section 1.2,
                                      and kl
                                      > in section 2.1 mean? That . in the times to separate hour, minute, and
                                      > second values is bound to confuse many people who aren't native Swedish
                                      > speakers, especially if the time is just two values (like the 23.59
                                      used
                                      > instead of 23:59).
                                      >

                                      This was a national Swedish standard, intended for Swedish-speaking
                                      users. A similar standard for, say, Germany, would of course use
                                      German words. It was withdrawn when ISO 8601 was issued, which is now
                                      the Swedish standard. As for the period (.), perhaps the ISO
                                      recommendation used a period. I don't know.

                                      It was an attempt to create a version of the standard for human
                                      communication, whereas ISO 8601 is about machine communication. The
                                      standard was consistent with how people usually write dates and times.
                                      I think the lack of such standards intended for human communication is
                                      one reason for the slow acceptance of the general date format
                                      (2004-01-23).
                                    • Fred Bone
                                      ... It s identical to the same rubric in the same section of the 1988 edition. However, it says omitted , not replaced by a space . Spaces do not occur in
                                      Message 18 of 27 , Jan 23, 2004
                                        "Per Johansson" wrote:

                                        > --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "jusjih" <jus168jih@s...> wrote:
                                        > > --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "Per Johansson" <per@j...> wrote:
                                        > > > --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, Jan Boström <jan@s...> wrote:
                                        > > > > As you state, strictly speaking "2003-11-22 13:30:15" is not an
                                        > > ISO
                                        > > > 8601 date. You could of course consider it an ISO 8601 date followed
                                        > > > by an ISO 8601 time, but since the date and time are related it
                                        > > would
                                        > > > not be correct.
                                        > >
                                        > > It's true. A note under 5.4.1 of ISO 8601 Final Draft dated 2000-12-
                                        > > 15 says that the letter T may be omitted if readily understood.
                                        > >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > I didn't even know that. Haven't read the new final draft in detail.
                                        >

                                        It's identical to the same rubric in the same section of the 1988
                                        edition.

                                        However, it says "omitted", not "replaced by a space". Spaces do not
                                        occur in ISO8601 representations (see 4.4 in the 2000 edition, 4.3 in
                                        the 1988 one).
                                      • Fred Bone
                                        ... It s not the least confusing for the target audience: a program. And as mentioned previously, spaces have no place in ISO8601 representations.
                                        Message 19 of 27 , Jan 23, 2004
                                          NGUYEN Adam wrote:

                                          > The '03:00-05:00' looks pretty confusing to the average reader.
                                          > Maybe this should be changed to '03:00:00 local time' and mention of what
                                          > location the event happened in or '03:00:00 (UTC+/-xx:yy:zz)'?

                                          It's not the least confusing for the target audience: a program. And
                                          as mentioned previously, spaces have no place in ISO8601
                                          representations.
                                        • NGUYEN Adam
                                          I agree again here. Date and Time for everyday use makes sense because uses very simple language. Human-oriented Date Representation should only be used in
                                          Message 20 of 27 , Jan 23, 2004
                                                     I agree again here. 'Date and Time for everyday use' makes sense because uses very simple language. 'Human-oriented Date Representation' should only be used in technical & standards documents.

                                                     Maybe even "zero hour", "zero thirty", "noon", and "twenty-three fifty-nine" would suffice for the talking clock saying 00:00, 00:30, 12:00, and 23:59?

                                                     Here's my suggestions for a standard date for everyday use:

                                            All Numbers (Full only): 2000-01-08
                                            Long-hand English (year-month-day): 2000 January 8 (Saturday)
                                            Short-hand English (year-month-day): 2000-Jan-08 (Sat.)
                                            Long-hand English (day-month-year): Saturday, 8 January, 2000
                                            Short-hand English (day-month-year): Sat., 08-Jan-2000

                                            Notice that only full dates are shown. Even though some of them are short-hand, they still get the whole message across, unlike the current practice of who knows how many different short-hand date format schemes. The 'All Numbers (Full only)' and 'Short-hand (year-month-day)' formats have the advantage of being able to fit nicely in tables for people to look at in a page.

                                                     I didn't include there how to say them but, they should all be said in any of the two following ways: 'Saturday, the eigth of January, two thousand' or 'two thousand, January eight, Saturday'.

                                                     Times should be in the 24-hour format, with whatever amount of precision needed. If the deciseconds (like 23:59:59.9) aren't needed, don't use them. If is all that's needed is just the hours & minutes, just use those, to keep it simple. It's good to know that it's possible to use such precision in a date & time, but it isn't always required. Usually times should be verbally expressed in 'zero hour(s)' (00:00) or 'seventeen forty-six' (17:46) forms, for times on the hour and times within the hour.

                                                     Timezones in international use such as the Internet, the aviation industry, or any other international industry shouldn't be used at all and instead, replaced with the UTC equivalent dates & times and those dates & times should be appended with a space and 'UTC' ( UTC). For normal everyday use, like talking on the phone, or a televsion or radio broadcast that people in more than one timezone may be watching or listening to, a sentence like 'Right now, it's Saturday, the eigth of January, two thousand, at seventeen forty-six here in New York City in the US.' should suffice.

                                                     Combinations of date, time, and timezone for international use are below:

                                            2000-01-08 17:46 UTC
                                            2000 January 8 (Saturday), 17:46, UTC
                                            2000-Jan-08 (Sat.), 17:46, UTC
                                            Saturday, 8 January, 2000, 17:46, UTC
                                            Sat., 08-Jan-2000, 17:46, UTC

                                                     For local use, just omit the ', UTC' and ' UTC'.

                                            At 2004-01-23 10:26 (UTC+0800), you wrote:[...]
                                                As a language instructor, I try to teach simplicity.  I find "Human-oriented Date Representation" a  little too complicated. 
                                            I would say: Date and Time for everyday use.
                                             
                                                Having said this, I would like to make ISO 8601 to be user-friendly for everyday users, like office clerks, shipping agents, lawyers, all non-technical professionals, or even homemakers who use calendars and answering machines in their daily lives.
                                             
                                                I want my 'talking clock' to show 00:30 and say "zero hour thirty", or even "half an hour after midnight" will suffice.
                                             
                                                We've heard from computer programmers who tried to settle the issue on systems talking to each other, then systems talking to people and vice versa.  Now we need  suggestions that give a 'plain English' version of ISO 8601, one that leaves room for personalization.
                                             
                                                My uncle in Hungary would like to add the name of the day to 2004 01 26  but he would want to be technically correct.  To him, Monday is hétfQ, to our Swedish friends it is probably mandag, To the French it is lundi, and to thirteen hundred million Chinese  Monday is xinzhi yi = Day One.
                                             
                                                The standard date should fit into any language, with margin left for expressing the name of the day in parentheses.
                                             
                                             
                                              Similarly, mm 01 (month) should be numeric with allowance for the name of the month, as in January -- Janvier -- Jänner -- januar etc to add the human touch.
                                             
                                             
                                              Historic year designations, such as year 5000+ for the Jews, 4000+ for the Chinese, yet again different years for the Japanese and the Taiwanese, should be relegated to the history books or to the religious commemorations.  The world-wide standard for yyyy is the current 2004.
                                             
                                                In telling the time, 13:30 should be qualified whether it is GMT, UTC, or what time zone.  Where ever the summer daylight time deviation exists, it should be noted. 
                                             
                                             
                                              It is seldom necessary for ordinary people to verbally express seconds, therefore 13:30 can be said in English as "thirteen-thirty" without adding the words "hour" and "minutes" in most cases.  If any doubt, one can add "thirteen-thirty p.m.". 
                                            European languages have already established their own methods of expressing time verbally, so my suggestion aims at standardizing English only.
                                             
                                                We need suggestions as to the writing and saying world standard date and time in English, while adding that other nations should be able to write the correct date and time without having to learn a huge vocabulary of English words.
                                             
                                            Budai, Andrew — Taiwan        2004 01 23 (Friday) 10:19

                                            [...]---
                                            Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
                                            Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
                                            Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 2004-01-22
                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.