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

Re: [json] json date format 2006-12-03T13:56:21

Expand Messages
  • Martin Cooper
    ... Yep. It s defined by ISO 8601. There s a summary of that here: http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/popstds/datesandtime.html I don t think it has a
    Message 1 of 12 , Dec 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      On 12/3/06, Peter Michaux <petermichaux@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi,
      >
      > I am trying the relatively new json.js code available on
      > http://www.json.org/json.js
      >
      > A date object is converted to the following format
      >
      > 2006-12-03T13:56:21
      >
      > Is this an international standard time representation?


      Yep. It's defined by ISO 8601. There's a summary of that here:

      http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/popstds/datesandtime.html

      I don't think it has a provision for milliseconds, but I could be wrong.

      --
      Martin Cooper


      Is there a reason to omit milliseconds? Not that I think milliseconds
      > are very important in most sitations but it seems ashame to loose them
      > if there is no particular reason.
      >
      > Thank you,
      > Peter
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Peter Michaux
      Hi Martin, ... Thanks for the link ... It looks like it does. From that link The standard has provisions for: (1) the omission of components representing
      Message 2 of 12 , Dec 3, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Martin,

        On 12/3/06, Martin Cooper <mfncooper@...> wrote:
        >
        > On 12/3/06, Peter Michaux <petermichaux@...> wrote:

        > >
        > > A date object is converted to the following format
        > >
        > > 2006-12-03T13:56:21
        > >
        > > Is this an international standard time representation?
        >
        > Yep. It's defined by ISO 8601. There's a summary of that here:
        >
        > http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/popstds/datesandtime.html

        Thanks for the link

        > I don't think it has a provision for milliseconds, but I could be wrong.

        It looks like it does. From that link

        The standard has provisions for:
        (1) the omission of components representing smaller units
        (seconds, minutes), where such precision is not needed,
        (2) the addition of a decimal fraction to the smallest time unit
        where higher precision is needed.

        Perhaps the Json code could be changed to

        return '"' + x.getFullYear() + '-' +
        f(x.getMonth() + 1) + '-' +
        f(x.getDate()) + 'T' +
        f(x.getHours()) + ':' +
        f(x.getMinutes()) + ':' +
        f(x.getSeconds()) + '.' +
        f(x.getMilliseconds()) + '"';

        There could be other reasons for excluding the milliseconds. Perhaps
        some of the systems with which json is intended to facilitate data
        transmission cannot handle milliseconds?

        Thanks,
        Peter
      • Jon Meyer
        Milliseconds don t seem that critical, but what about generating UTC and appending a Z ? i.e. return + x.getFullYearUTC() + - + f(x.getMonthUTC() + 1)
        Message 3 of 12 , Dec 4, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Milliseconds don't seem that critical, but what about generating UTC
          and appending a "Z"? i.e.

          return '"' + x.getFullYearUTC() + '-' +
          f(x.getMonthUTC() + 1) + '-' +
          f(x.getDateUTC()) + 'T' +
          f(x.getHoursUTC()) + ':' +
          f(x.getMinutesUTC()) + ':' +
          "Z"

          How would the server know what the time means otherwise?

          Cheers

          Jon
        • Kevin Prichard
          ... Keep in mind that the Javascript date class/objects have methods for setting and getting time in milliseconds (and new Date() constructors can also
          Message 4 of 12 , Dec 4, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            On 12/4/06, Jon Meyer <jonmeyer@...> wrote:
            > Milliseconds don't seem that critical

            Keep in mind that the Javascript date class/objects have methods for setting
            and getting time in milliseconds (and 'new Date()' constructors can also
            assigns milliseconds.) Excluding milliseconds might be, for some
            applications, the equivalent of truncating floats to ints.

            On 12/4/06, Jon Meyer <jonmeyer@...> wrote:
            >
            > Milliseconds don't seem that critical, but what about generating UTC
            > and appending a "Z"? i.e.
            >
            > return '"' + x.getFullYearUTC() + '-' +
            > f(x.getMonthUTC() + 1) + '-' +
            > f(x.getDateUTC()) + 'T' +
            > f(x.getHoursUTC()) + ':' +
            > f(x.getMinutesUTC()) + ':' +
            > "Z"
            >
            > How would the server know what the time means otherwise?
            >
            > Cheers
            >
            > Jon
            >
            >


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Peter Michaux
            ... This is what I was thinking. Milliseconds could be important at times and seems unfortunate to throw them out if there is no reason. Peter
            Message 5 of 12 , Dec 4, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              On 12/4/06, Kevin Prichard <kprichard@...> wrote:
              >
              > On 12/4/06, Jon Meyer <jonmeyer@...> wrote:
              > > Milliseconds don't seem that critical
              >
              > Keep in mind that the Javascript date class/objects have methods for setting
              > and getting time in milliseconds (and 'new Date()' constructors can also
              > assigns milliseconds.) Excluding milliseconds might be, for some
              > applications, the equivalent of truncating floats to ints.
              >

              This is what I was thinking. Milliseconds could be important at times
              and seems unfortunate to throw them out if there is no reason.

              Peter
            • Gaetano Giunta
              afaik, jsonrpc uses a variant of ISO without millliseconds. also, for most databases, the standard date and time fields omit milliseconds (a timestamp value is
              Message 6 of 12 , Dec 5, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                afaik, jsonrpc uses a variant of ISO without millliseconds.
                also, for most databases, the standard date and time fields omit milliseconds (a timestamp value is used for that)


                -----Original Message-----
                From: json@yahoogroups.com [mailto:json@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Peter Michaux
                Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 11:38 PM
                To: json@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [json] json date format 2006-12-03T13:56:21


                Hi Martin,

                On 12/3/06, Martin Cooper <mfncooper@...> wrote:
                >
                > On 12/3/06, Peter Michaux <petermichaux@...> wrote:

                > >
                > > A date object is converted to the following format
                > >
                > > 2006-12-03T13:56:21
                > >
                > > Is this an international standard time representation?
                >
                > Yep. It's defined by ISO 8601. There's a summary of that here:
                >
                > http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/popstds/datesandtime.html

                Thanks for the link

                > I don't think it has a provision for milliseconds, but I could be wrong.

                It looks like it does. From that link

                The standard has provisions for:
                (1) the omission of components representing smaller units
                (seconds, minutes), where such precision is not needed,
                (2) the addition of a decimal fraction to the smallest time unit
                where higher precision is needed.

                Perhaps the Json code could be changed to

                return '"' + x.getFullYear() + '-' +
                f(x.getMonth() + 1) + '-' +
                f(x.getDate()) + 'T' +
                f(x.getHours()) + ':' +
                f(x.getMinutes()) + ':' +
                f(x.getSeconds()) + '.' +
                f(x.getMilliseconds()) + '"';

                There could be other reasons for excluding the milliseconds. Perhaps
                some of the systems with which json is intended to facilitate data
                transmission cannot handle milliseconds?

                Thanks,
                Peter




                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Peter Michaux
                ... Douglas, is there a particular reason for not including milliseconds in json.js? Thanks, Peter -- Fork JavaScript: http://forkjavascript.org
                Message 7 of 12 , Jan 6, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 12/4/06, Peter Michaux <petermichaux@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > This is what I was thinking. Milliseconds could be important at times
                  > and seems unfortunate to throw them out if there is no reason.

                  Douglas, is there a particular reason for not including milliseconds in json.js?

                  Thanks,
                  Peter
                  --
                  Fork JavaScript: http://forkjavascript.org
                • Douglas Crockford
                  ... in json.js? You have the source, you can put them in any time you want to. But first, let me ask you a question: How confident that your system s clock has
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jan 6, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > Douglas, is there a particular reason for not including milliseconds
                    in json.js?

                    You have the source, you can put them in any time you want to. But
                    first, let me ask you a question: How confident that your system's
                    clock has millisecond accuracy? And that the latency of the OS +
                    Browser + JavaScript will not cause significant drift by the time it
                    is delivered to your application? How meaningful will the milliseconds
                    be when you put them on the wire and send them to your server, whose
                    clock is not in sync with yours? Milliseconds are a waste of time.

                    There are applications, such as video editing, where subsecond
                    accuracy is important. If you have such an application, then you would
                    want to tack on frames or fractional seconds. If you don't really need
                    it, then it is better to not deceive yourself with false precision.
                  • Peter Michaux
                    ... I m sorry for bothering you, sir. Thank you for your answer. I ll go back to my corner now. Peter
                    Message 9 of 12 , Jan 6, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On 1/6/07, Douglas Crockford <douglas@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > > Douglas, is there a particular reason for not including milliseconds
                      > in json.js?
                      >
                      > You have the source, you can put them in any time you want to. But
                      > first, let me ask you a question: How confident that your system's
                      > clock has millisecond accuracy? And that the latency of the OS +
                      > Browser + JavaScript will not cause significant drift by the time it
                      > is delivered to your application? How meaningful will the milliseconds
                      > be when you put them on the wire and send them to your server, whose
                      > clock is not in sync with yours? Milliseconds are a waste of time.

                      I'm sorry for bothering you, sir. Thank you for your answer. I'll go
                      back to my corner now.

                      Peter
                    • Peter Michaux
                      ... A date object is not necessarily constructed with no arguments sent to the Date constructor. It could very well be that in some applications the
                      Message 10 of 12 , Jan 10, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On 1/6/07, Douglas Crockford <douglas@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > > Douglas, is there a particular reason for not including milliseconds
                        > in json.js?
                        >
                        > You have the source, you can put them in any time you want to. But
                        > first, let me ask you a question: How confident that your system's
                        > clock has millisecond accuracy? And that the latency of the OS +
                        > Browser + JavaScript will not cause significant drift by the time it
                        > is delivered to your application? How meaningful will the milliseconds
                        > be when you put them on the wire and send them to your server, whose
                        > clock is not in sync with yours? Milliseconds are a waste of time.

                        A date object is not necessarily constructed with no arguments sent to
                        the Date constructor. It could very well be that in some applications
                        the construction of the Date object could use date data from a user
                        input which has very accurate and critical milliseconds information
                        from another very accurate system.

                        Peter
                      • geoffreyk00
                        ... milliseconds ... But ... system s ... time it ... milliseconds ... whose ... time. ... sent to ... applications ... The date object may be historical data
                        Message 11 of 12 , Jan 11, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In json@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Michaux" <petermichaux@...>
                          wrote:
                          >
                          > On 1/6/07, Douglas Crockford <douglas@...> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > > Douglas, is there a particular reason for not including
                          milliseconds
                          > > in json.js?
                          > >
                          > > You have the source, you can put them in any time you want to.
                          But
                          > > first, let me ask you a question: How confident that your
                          system's
                          > > clock has millisecond accuracy? And that the latency of the OS +
                          > > Browser + JavaScript will not cause significant drift by the
                          time it
                          > > is delivered to your application? How meaningful will the
                          milliseconds
                          > > be when you put them on the wire and send them to your server,
                          whose
                          > > clock is not in sync with yours? Milliseconds are a waste of
                          time.
                          >
                          > A date object is not necessarily constructed with no arguments
                          sent to
                          > the Date constructor. It could very well be that in some
                          applications
                          > the construction of the Date object could use date data from a user
                          > input which has very accurate and critical milliseconds information
                          > from another very accurate system.
                          >
                          > Peter
                          >

                          The date object may be historical data that truly is millisecond-
                          accurate. The object does not have to be constructed when the
                          dataset is created or by the server that is delivering the dataset.
                          I more likely will have been created long before, with many date
                          objects that do need this level of accuracy.

                          I can see no reason to not to include milliseconds, and many reasons
                          to keep them.
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.