Closed KeithTsui closed 9 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601 http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime
It looks like they are both valid formats, note the last two lines in the table below.
Year:
YYYY (eg 1997)
Year and month:
YYYY-MM (eg 1997-07)
Complete date:
YYYY-MM-DD (eg 1997-07-16)
Complete date plus hours and minutes:
YYYY-MM-DDThh:mmTZD (eg 1997-07-16T19:20+01:00)
Complete date plus hours, minutes and seconds:
YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssTZD (eg 1997-07-16T19:20:30+01:00)
Complete date plus hours, minutes, seconds and a decimal fraction of a
second
YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss.sTZD (eg 1997-07-16T19:20:30.45+01:00)
Any compliant library should be able to parse them without issue.
Is there another reason for wanting the consistency?
Closing this, Balanced always provides ISO 8601 compliant dates.
Seeing Balanced callback events with timestamps up to seconds precision while others go up to microseconds. Would be great to have a standardized notation for parsing purposes.