annnnnnnd that’s enough lemmy for the day
I prefer %a, %d %b %Y %T %Z because of legacy support
>>> time.strftime("%a, %d %b %Y %T %Z") 'Tue, 02 Sep 2025 14:06:16 GMT'YYYY/MM/DD is good for file locating in a single folder.
deleted by creator
This is the way
this is the way
This iso the way
I just do YY/MM/DD. It is highly unlikely someone is looking at those files a century later.
And now I feel old. 😞
I’m old too, but I don’t have files from the last century.
Even so, the next 90s are still a looong way to go. I am going to be ashes by then…
ISO 8601 is the only true answer.
Use ISO 8601 or get out.
Except, don’t actually use ISO 8601 because the T in the middle looks stupid.
You’re in luck! The
Tis optional provided you include separators between your hours, minutes, and seconds!hmmm… but without a T you get
2025-09-0119:42
0119 looks weird.
ISO 8601 FTW
I didn’t get erect by that wiki, but it moved slightly
Found the wikisexual.
YYYY-MM-DD
:hh:mm:ss optional
Also makes it easier to sort
Exactly! I generate a frack-ton of excel reports at work, and I output them in the format Subject-Report-2025-09-01.
And on another note, when you’re traveling through the time Continuum, do you ask the nearest person for the day and month first? Nope, it’s always “what year is it?!” because you’re probably being chased by futuristic terrorists or super soldiers…
You, I like you.
I agree. What is the point of dating things if they aren’t in order when done.
Sometimes it’s just about the sex.
YYYY-MM-DD gang rise up!
ISO 8601. This is the way.
For naming in file names yes.
For every mention of any date ever.
Even when talking to your friends.
When’s your birthday?
2025-11-23
<1993-11-23+1y>
(repeating timestamp)
Surely you mean
R/1993-11-23/P1Y?oh wow, did not know that had a spec!
I was referring to:
https://orgmode.org/manual/Repeated-tasks.htmlAnd I don’t know enough about orgmode!
I may need to add it to my comparison of formats: https://webcoder.info/recurrence.html
For naming the person your dating no
Any answer other than ISO 8601 is a red flag
RFC 3339 has less ambiguities, see https://ijmacd.github.io/rfc3339-iso8601/
Sure, but that’s also iso8601:
This document defines a date and time format for use in Internet protocols that is a profile of the ISO 8601 standard
What exactly does it mean to be a “profile” of ISO-8601?
I’m just making it up as I type, but I’d say it’s within the iso frame but more specific
RFC3339 allows certain things that ISO8601 doesn’t, like leaving out the T
Right … what makes it a “profile” exactly?
From what I can find they define a profile as
profile - subset of features described in a standard or a set of standards
How is it a subset if it actually contradicts the standard? ( by using a space instead of T or no separator between date and time)
Yeah, I prefer a space or underscore instead of the T, much easier to read.
I’m afraid you’re date is incompatible with mine. I prefer the number of seconds since 1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC stored in a 64 bit signed int.
RED FLAG! RED FLAG!!!
April 25th, of course.
April 5th, 2063
YYYYMMDD is the best. Easiest to sort.
you forgot this: –
No
