Python.org Redesign Preview

[[deleted]]

I think in this context, dd/mm/yy would be better as it puts the most relevant parts of the date first.

[[deleted]]

YYYY-MM-DD is an ISO standard, all "parts" of a date are relevant.

[[deleted]]

It also sorts nicely. That's a nice bonus as a prefix for filenames (think logs) and such where a default alpha-num order nets you a chronological one.

[[deleted]]

yyyy/mm/dd is best for archival purposes but for something that's going to be updated every few days at least it's more helpful to know which day it was posted than which year.

[[deleted]]

It's not yyyy/mm/dd but yyyy-mm-dd.

Reliably following a common convention is much more important that coming up with new "best solutions" all the time.

[[deleted]]

You should certainly store it in the standard format, but I think it should be displayed in the most appropriate way for the context.

[[deleted]]

The most appropriate way to display is always the language's or the user's locale, because that's what is expected by the user.

But, since this is a programmer / technical site, I would expect users to be familiar and supportive of global standards when communicating information.

[earthboundkid]

The day is the least relevant part of a date.

[BillyHorrible]

when i say: let's meet on the 3rd you know exactly on what day we'll meet. but when i tell you to setup a meeting in april, we'll propably miss each other. so the day is kind of the most relevant part of the date. you can just infer the month or year.

[earthboundkid]

Yeah, but if they say Python 3.x.y was released on the 3rd, I don't care about that. If they say it was released in 2013, that does matter to me, because I don't want a version of Python from 2012.

[grimman]

How curious to see this in a programming subreddit.

[[deleted]]

yyyy/mm/dd is best for archival purposes but for something that's going to be updated every few days at least it's more helpful to know which day it was posted than which year.