Honestly look very readable to me, though I’m not sure on the timezone bit. Maybe they left it out? Ohterwise it’s 26th of January 2025, 18:41
It’s gonna be problematic when there’s 5 digit years, but other than that it’s… not good, but definitely less ambiguous than any “normally formatted” date where DD <= 12. Is it MM/DD or DD/MM? We’ll never fucking know!
Of course, YYYY-MM-DD is still the king because it’s both human readable and sortable as a regular string without converting it into a datetime object or anything.
All you’d have to do to make it much more readable is separate the time and the year with some kind of separator like a hyphen, slash or dot. Also “Z” is the time zone, denoting UTC (see also military time zones)
Honestly look very readable to me, though I’m not sure on the timezone bit. Maybe they left it out? Ohterwise it’s 26th of January 2025, 18:41
It’s gonna be problematic when there’s 5 digit years, but other than that it’s… not good, but definitely less ambiguous than any “normally formatted” date where DD <= 12. Is it MM/DD or DD/MM? We’ll never fucking know!
Of course, YYYY-MM-DD is still the king because it’s both human readable and sortable as a regular string without converting it into a datetime object or anything.
All you’d have to do to make it much more readable is separate the time and the year with some kind of separator like a hyphen, slash or dot. Also “Z” is the time zone, denoting UTC (see also military time zones)
Oh, duh. It’s why all my timestamps have Z’s in the database lmao
Thing is, you’re right that the separation would help, but this is still way less ambiguous that MM/DD vs DD/MM if you ask me.