Re: [saag] [art] Date formats: RFC3339 vs. RFC 5322

[Claudio Allocchio <[e-mail]>]

let me do a wider diversion:

human reading of time and date, was and still is a cause of problems: the 
human readable version, with all its flavours, variants, causes 
headaches... every time we schedule a meeting we need to ensure all do 
understand when it is... 04/07/2021  at 2.30PM  is it the 4th day of July 
2021, or th e 7th date of April? 2.30PM which time zone? DST or not?

So to go back to the point, +1 to John: ISO 8601 is better, also for 
humans!

(the date/time paring code for email gateways I wrote 30+ years ago was 
a set of nested "if" "then" "else" "and" "or" and tables... no thank you.)


On Tue, 13 Apr 2021, John C Klensin wrote:

>
>
> --On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 19:00 +0000 "Eliot Lear (elear)"
> <elear=[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> The question is whether you need something that is easy to
>> parse or something that is human readable and can be
>> localized.  It SEEMs that this draft is intended to be human
>> readable, and so 5322 doesn't seem out of bounds.
>
> I suggest that even for reading by humans in 2021 --as distinct
> from 1982 (RFC 822) or 1977 (RFC 733, which used day-month-year
> ordering)-- the 5322 dates are not easy to understand and use...
> at least unless one is an English speaker on this side of the
> pond.  It was quite wise at the time to spell out the month
> name, thereby eliminating the ambiguity associated with, e.g.,
> 5/10/1977, but still bad news for someone who might think the
> fourth month in the Gregorian calendar is, e.g., апреля,
> أبريل , or 四月.
>
> So I would argue that, for new protocols or data structures in
> this increasingly global/ international Internet, and even for
> elements visible to humans, sticking as close to ISO 8601 as
> possible (with minimal profiling) is the Right Thing to Do.
> Much too late now to change the 822/5322 format, turning
> supplemental protocols for email into a gray area, but, for new
> work, ISO 8601 formats are not just easier to parse but easier
> to understand globally and in an unambiguous way.
>
> Just my opinion, of course.
>
>
>    john
>
> _______________________________________________
> art mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claudio Allocchio             G   A   R   R          [e-mail]
                         Senior Technical Officer
tel: [phone]      Italian Academic and       G=Claudio; S=Allocchio;
fax: [phone]        Research Network         P=garr; A=garr; C=it;

      PGP Key: https://www.cert.garr.it/servizi/informazioni-su-pgp-keys