Difference between revisions of "Date formats"

From LibrePlanet
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 3: Line 3:
 
Consistency would make the pages look nicer and give better experience for the reader.  
 
Consistency would make the pages look nicer and give better experience for the reader.  
  
* YYYY-MM-DD h?:m?:i? (ISO 8601)
+
* YYYY-MM-DD (ISO 8601)
** http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/ - 2008-10-20 14:12:37 -0400
+
** no time
* YYYY-MM-DD h?:m? AM/PM
+
*** http://directory.fsf.org/
** http://www.fsf.org/about/ - "Last modified  2008-04-28 11:42 AM" (plone?)
+
** YYYY-MM-DD h?:m?:i? (ISO 8601)
 +
*** http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/ - 2008-10-20 14:12:37 -0400
 +
** YYYY-MM-DD h?:m? AM/PM
 +
*** http://www.fsf.org/about/ - "Last modified  2008-04-28 11:42 AM" (plone?)
 
* YYYY/MM/DD
 
* YYYY/MM/DD
 
** http://www.gnu.org/ - Last Updated:  $Date: 2008/10/15 20:49:51 $  
 
** http://www.gnu.org/ - Last Updated:  $Date: 2008/10/15 20:49:51 $  

Revision as of 14:48, 20 October 2008

Date format across fsf.org and gnu.org are inconsistent.

Consistency would make the pages look nicer and give better experience for the reader.