Talk:ISO 8601

Standard Date
You can use quite a couple templates, in the YYYY-MM-DD date format

or  could be used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.31.29.4 (talk • contribs) 00:47, 10 November 2018 UTC (UTC)

Criteria for 'adoption'
Does the standard need to be translated and republished in a country as a new document to be 'adopted' ?

Example: Denmark is listed as DS/ISO 8601:2005 (replaced DS/EN 28601). In DK we stopped translating after 2005 but yet we have ratified/adopted ISO 8601-1:2019, ISO 8601-2:2019 and ISO 8601-1:2019/Amd 1:2022. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A06:4000:8006:A:CB19:6707:26CB:C5C5 (talk) 22:23, 3 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't know how things work in Denmark. In the United States the Congress has never passed a general-purpose law about how dates should be written. Congress hasn't even passed a law adopting the Gregorian calendar.
 * What the US does have is several not-for-profit private organizations that create voluntary standards. Among these are the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (of which I am a member) and many more. ISO-8601 is available through ANSI; I'm not sure if they have "adopted" it or they are just providing a way to buy it within the US.
 * Sometimes Congress passes a law that adopts one of the above-mentioned voluntary standards for a particular purpose. I'm not aware of that happening for ISO-8601. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:14, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Why was this section deleted? BobKilcoyne (talk) 07:27, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Should we remove the "Current time"?
We might rephrase or delete it so it wouldn't be misleading.

It might confuse the readers looking for the current time, it's not guaranteed to be the current time, since it requires a page purge to update it.

Or we should at least add a disclaimer, but it might be too verbose and distracting. I'm not sure if there is a standard wikipedia disclaimer for this kind of element on pages. Lucasxp64 (talk) 15:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect dash-like character changes
On 17 January 2024 made an edit which changed many dash-like character changes, quite a few of which were incorrect or inadvisable. For example, the article presented ""2004-05" as valid ISO 8601 notation for May 2004, which it is. The edit changed it to "2004–05" (that is, using an n-dash character) which has an entirely different meaning, 2004-2005. In another spot "&amp;minus;05:00 was changed to "−05:00" which isn't incorrect, but presents difficulties for editors, because in edit mode it is just about impossible to distinguish the various dash-like characters. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Contradictory statements about prefixing times with 'T'
This (in Times):

ISO 8601-1:2019 allows the T to be omitted in the extended format, as in "13:47:30", but only allows the T to be omitted in the basic format when there is no risk of confusion with date expressions.

contradicts this (in Combined date and time representations):

In ISO 8601:2004 it was permitted to omit the "T" character by mutual agreement as in "200704051430",[37] but this provision was removed in ISO 8601-1:2019.

Lacking access to the published standard, I've no way of ascertaining which is correct. Roger Rohrbach (talk) 01:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)


 * What's meant by the 1st statement is that "194705" is not allowed as a time (except when context implies it has to be time), because it could mean May 1947. It would have to be "T194705" or "19:47:05" to be unambiguously a time and not a date. The 2nd statement applies only when a date and a time are combined. There is no contradiction. Indefatigable (talk) 17:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)