Skip to content

Methods 'mm-dd-yyyy' and 'dd-mm-yyyy' inappropriately refer to ISO 8601 #4579

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

tbrowder
Copy link
Member

ISO 8601 details YYYY-MM-DD format, but the same link also discusses other Gregorian time formats. To correct the existing description, this PR keeps the same link (where the formats are described), but changes the link description as appropriate for each method's format as shown on that same page,

Kept the same link (where the formats are described), but
changed the link description as appropriate for each
method's format as shown on that same page,

- Addresses doc issue Raku#4576
@tbrowder tbrowder self-assigned this May 21, 2025
@tbrowder tbrowder requested a review from coke May 21, 2025 16:07
@arkiuat
Copy link

arkiuat commented May 21, 2025

but the same link also discusses other Gregorian time formats

Where are you seeing this discussion?

The link is to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601, and I went looking, but couldn't find any such discussion.

mm-dd-yyyy and dd-mm-yyyy aren't even mentioned as output formats, much less discussed. All I could find were one or two mentions (not discussions) as input formats, but these two methods are both accessors, not constructors.

The wikipedia article only mentioned them as things to be converted to yyyy-mm-dd, so this doesn't provide any support for the idea that it's not misleading to mention ISO8601 in the context of these two (unlike yyyy-mm-dd).

@tbrowder
Copy link
Member Author

Where are you seeing this discussion?

The link has been corrected.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants