📅 Original date posted:2015-02-02
📝 Original message:On 02/02/2015 03:47 PM, vv01f wrote:
>>> Uff, I would expect YYYYMMDD there so it's human readable as well.
>>
>> Those strings are not meant to be read by humans. YYYYMMDD is more
>> complicated than necessary, given that Bitcoin deals with seconds since
>> epoch everywhere.
>
> First that is a pitty .. as its simply a waste of storage.
>
> but back to Pavol's point: IMHO no harm to anything, as Bitcoin never
> has any valid timestamp below ~1230768000 (jan2009) and thus will always
> have 10 digits.. you can easily identify 8 char long timestamp as the
> proposed format.
> And there never is anything wrong with having a transparent, human
> readable option - especially when it saves 2 bytes in e.g. qr-codes.
Pavol's suggestion saves 2 chars only because its just a date. I think
the creation date should be at least precise to the hour, if not to the
minute.
But anyhow, if everyone prefers a human readble date format I will bow
to the majority.
Andreas Schildbach [ARCHIVE] /
npub1xg…adsv7
2023-06-07 15:29:26
in reply to nevent1q…xgn0
Author Public Key
npub1xg2m84malu0cfm4444r0kysx4rgk27e75aj6sz6538kw8fcz627qeadsv7Published at
2023-06-07 15:29:26Event JSON
{
"id": "c224f91ab8cbb2e607f25ca00d5001676ae5a280d09d60135f83003765c370bb",
"pubkey": "3215b3d77dff1f84eeb5ad46fb1206a8d1657b3ea765a80b5489ece3a702d2bc",
"created_at": 1686151766,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"da5dfa7015ad7eb23fb699400b79b743db94aa85c8d6df42489b5ad471f64cea",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"988554775dd2011c5d3f3431dce10c91a7308060da73fa43c804434abbdd94dd",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"d38df61bb4c2a88c75d64e13e669c71f494861db3ace4782c60a471bd31493fa"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-02-02\n📝 Original message:On 02/02/2015 03:47 PM, vv01f wrote:\n\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Uff, I would expect YYYYMMDD there so it's human readable as well.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Those strings are not meant to be read by humans. YYYYMMDD is more\n\u003e\u003e complicated than necessary, given that Bitcoin deals with seconds since\n\u003e\u003e epoch everywhere.\n\u003e \n\u003e First that is a pitty .. as its simply a waste of storage.\n\u003e \n\u003e but back to Pavol's point: IMHO no harm to anything, as Bitcoin never\n\u003e has any valid timestamp below ~1230768000 (jan2009) and thus will always\n\u003e have 10 digits.. you can easily identify 8 char long timestamp as the\n\u003e proposed format.\n\u003e And there never is anything wrong with having a transparent, human\n\u003e readable option - especially when it saves 2 bytes in e.g. qr-codes.\n\nPavol's suggestion saves 2 chars only because its just a date. I think\nthe creation date should be at least precise to the hour, if not to the\nminute.\n\nBut anyhow, if everyone prefers a human readble date format I will bow\nto the majority.",
"sig": "b4ac266c1a5c0bcb2ae7af06140bd9bb797c776c6b799c90c75b983d7deb4281163844a8d77c6f10004ff84ec166f84dc0e11f386210793721a8ae500336955e"
}