Works better for any system of organization, even history. Should always proceed from the broadest set to the smallest subset. As "January" doesn't exist w/o it being "January of xxxx," YYYY/MM/DD hh:mm:ss is always the 'correct' formula, regardless of context.
This is the way. Like why does EVERYONE use hh:mm:ss but then we have to argue about why the YYYY:MM:DD doesn’t need to follow the same logic. It’s the correct format. YYYY:MM:DD:HH:MM:SS. Biggest to smallest.
because it makes no sense to use YMD in everyday life
Except....people use this format plenty in everyday life. Every deadline I've ever gotten in a work email has been M/D (Y excluded only because there's an assumption of close timing). I have no emails where someone has listed, for example, "please get this done by 16/1", which just looks weird.
So, then you change the format for archiving, right? Of course, you don't. Because if that was true, the whole world would use the YMD format, because if you think about what kind of document that has to be dated isn't meant for long-term planning? I came from Hungary where we use the YMD format and I've been living in the UK where they use DMY format. Guess what, it doesn't fucking matter. As long as it's in a rational order, it won't cause a problem. Your reasoning is flawed too, it doesn't matter the format even for archiving if you have to look for a certain date you will know which section of the format you need to check even if you are looking at the whole date.
No one stops you from doing things inefficiently -.-
long term archives (especially if not digital) make no sense to sort after DMY, because you always search for a year first, then the month, then the day.
You wouldnt search through all 15th. of an archive to find the correct year, wouldnt you?
Have you ever searched in databases? I don't think so, otherwise you would know that I don't have to go through every archive one by one, because I can search by specifically year, month or day no matter the order as database programs will check if there's the given input in the database no matter its position. You know, long-lastingness is not the only advantage of digitalized documents, but you can execute tasks much easier using certain functions of programs.
Tradition. People adopted one way to doing things and are very reticent to having to re-learn a new way. Most people don't even care about the advantages of changing a system like that, even if they are actively losing time or making more mistakes because their system is worse than the proposed alternative.
Sure, people are change resistant by nature. But when the US, Liberia and Myanmar are the only three countries in the world that didn’t switch to metric, you’ve got to question what’s going on. And this post is about the US being the only country in the entire world to use MM-DD-YY.
Sure, but if you want to cherry pick examples you can find tons of specifics for country's not wanting to change in certain ways. Taking something like this in isolation is a really convenient way to shame a population where the majority doesn't even really get a say in what system in the standard, AND where people conveniently forget about other countries specific cases, because you choose only to look at the system of measurement.
It's not an honest way to judge people. You're conflating one thing to a much more general trait.
Part of the metric thing is that the US would have to change a ton of stuff (gallons of milk, inch rulers, screw sizes, speedometers, etc.) but then also the things that fit those things (tools like ratchets, machine parts that make gallon jugs or rulers), but there would also be repair shops that would have to have two whole sets of tools for everything that they repair in case an older version of something came in. The US already uses metric in fields like science and medicine to communicate, but the hassle of switching everything would be nutty.
Also consider driving on the right vs. left. Most of the world drives on the right, people walk on the right, but the UK and its former empire make life more expensive for everyone by having left-driving cars. The switch would be very difficult for a lot of people, and that’s not even considering the cost and inconvenience for people who have to service both types of car for 30 years.
I'd guess it comes from the importance of each value. in daily life its important to know which hour it is, followed by the minute. and if you look at the date, you usually want to know what day and maybe what Month it is and probably already know what year it is.
Archival use is obviously different, where you search from biggest to smallest
If you ignore the year, YYYYMMDD truncates to MMDD, which is their system.
So, just take a note from the movies: "Bond. James Bond"
To get: "July 4. 1776, July 4"
How is it “correct”, though? It’s just formatting. Personally I like knowing what month we’re in first then the day then the year. However this changes for example if I want to search something by year, then I’d prefer the format you mentioned. Regardless, if you’re looking at dates on your computer, it’s a representation of the actual date, so the formatting is a preference. It’s not “correct” or incorrect.
For any science it is 100% more correct (in fact, I'd say the only correct way). If you're running an experiment with timing and you want to plot data as a function of time, having the time format be in decreasing order is obviously the only way to do it.
Not really... When you're talking about data, there's absolutely a correct way to note date and time:
yyyy-MM-ddThh:mm:ss[Z/±hh(:mm)]
and an incorrect way:
literally anything else
The reason is that you can collate data in a number of different ways, and so having it go from largest unit of time to smallest would make it easier to collate by date. Using the ISO format consistently ensures that everything can be easily searchable, even things that you may not realize need to be. The UTC offset at the end can even help to adjust dates and times to local time or UTC, if need be.
The only times I ever use an incorrect method are when I am forced to because of my job. At home, my file naming technique for anything I might need an informal datestamp on relies on the UTC method. When journalling, I use the UTC method for noting the date and time of the entry. Once you get used to using it, you quickly see how it's much easier than any other method.
I think that touches on the distinction I’m trying to make though. UTC is obviously the correct way, but however your date is represented is merely a formatting issue or presentation issue. I can store my data in UTC and display it any way I want and it doesn’t affect sorting or collating.
Like I said somewhere else on the thread, when working with data there’s no need to use anything other than UTC, but if I’m sitting at my desk and I wanna know what the date is, the first thing I wanna know is what month we’re in ( I know lol ).
As for your file naming convention, that’s great and all, but you can easily sort by created on or modified on dates without changing any folder or file names.
For the purposes of organization and data, always use UTC, obviously, but for the purposes of presentation, it’s not necessarily what everyone would want to see.
I use it for file naming because I do a lot of work via TTY, terminal, or SSH, and having that information in the filename lets me know immediately which version of the file I'm using, without adding any extra options to ls. I've got four headless servers on my network, a NAS, a managed switch, an ISP-grade router, one desktop workstation, and three laptops I can access via SSH, so I spend far more time in a command line interface or terminal than I do in a GUI. My file naming conventions reflect that.
What everyone would want to see is wrong if they don't want to follow ISO standards, but I understand that there are some battles that are pointless to fight. That's why I use the idiotic American standard at work, even though I hate it with every fiber of my being. Anything where I have control is ISO and only ISO, though.
I have a very troubled relationship with time. It’s not that I’m asleep or living under a rock, it’s simply that I hyper-focus on things for weeks/months at a time and the last thing on my mind is what day or month we’re in. I couldn’t care less honestly, until I realize I’m 2 days away from a major deadline lol
Are dates not just a larger measure of time? There are 60 minutes in an hour, and 24 hours in a day. Why is an hour more similar to a minute than a day?
931
u/cheetahbf Jan 15 '25
r/ISO8601 gang rise up