Re^2: Does ISO8601 require a separator in the time if one is used in the date?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Does ISO8601 require a separator in the time if one is used in the date? by 1nickt (Canon) on Mar 01, 2018 at 20:13 UTC
Yes, I've seen that. Do you have a link to the spec (see original question)? The 2000 spec was superceded by the 2004 spec which is available for purchase at https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:8601:ed-3:v1:en. But I can not find a published version of it. Edit: An older working doc: http://www.loc.gov/standards/datetime/iso-tc154-wg5_n0038_iso_wd_8601-1_2016-02-16.pdf. In this doc the only examples of "expanded" format datetimes have separators in both date and time. Another piece of circumstantial evidence ... The way forward always starts with a minimal test.	[reply]
Re^4: Does ISO8601 require a separator in the time if one is used in the date? by Eily (Monsignor) on Mar 02, 2018 at 09:16 UTC
Well that doc has (4.3.3), which only applies to incomplete dates (eg: no seconds): the expression shall either be completely in basic format, in which case the minimum number of separators necessary for the required expression is used, or completely in extended format, in which case additional separators shall be used in accordance with 4.1 and 4.2. 4.4.4.1 also has: provided that the resulting expression is either consistently in basic format or consistently in extended format but that's for an interval, so it's mostly about having the format for the start and end (although the chosen phrasing also means consistent format within the dates). Same in 4.4.4.3 for start + duration and 4.4.4.4 for duration + end. And there's 4.4.5 which is the same as 4.3.3 for duration rather than single dates.	[reply]