ISO 1(en.wikipedia.org)
en.wikipedia.org
ISO 1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_1
7 comments
I wish ISO 8601 would have been the first one. Then, perhaps, we would not have this: http://xkcd.com/1179/
As someone who just wrote a universal international date/time conversion/comparison app for our portal...I FREAKIN concur.
The worst offender for all time has to be Oracle.
Outside of '01-JAN-1999', I am forever Googling "TO_DATE Oracle" because the string formats for precision time stamps always turn out to be counter-intuitive, and the exact opposite of what I expect.
Like:
Outside of '01-JAN-1999', I am forever Googling "TO_DATE Oracle" because the string formats for precision time stamps always turn out to be counter-intuitive, and the exact opposite of what I expect.
Like:
TO_DATE('01-JAN-1999 23:59:59', 'DD-MON-YYYY HH24:MI:SS')
I found ISO 2 to be even more interesting, the second international standard is... yarns? Or rather, the directional twist of yarns? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_2
Ah, you did the same thing I did.
If you make it to ISO_8, you get redirected to this page, which really cuts the browsing time down: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_International_Organiza...
If you make it to ISO_8, you get redirected to this page, which really cuts the browsing time down: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_International_Organiza...
It's probably worth pointing out here that there is a navbox, and he could have been using that; you'll notice it doesn't include a link for ISO 8.
The time gap is also interesting: ISO 1 was was adopted in 1951, and ISO 2 in 1973. Thereafter they seem to have become much more regular.
[deleted]
The thing that confuses me is that the current revision of ISO 1 was published in 2002, as an update of the original 1975 revision.
What on earth needed revising? What part of "20 degrees celsius" didn't they explain properly?
What on earth needed revising? What part of "20 degrees celsius" didn't they explain properly?
If I'm not mistaken, ISO makes most of its money not from member contributions but from selling paper copies of the standards. Speaking cynically, perhaps they needed a way to ensure their clients (libraries, companies, governments) will pay for "updates".
>all those Wikipedia articles on the frontpage
What is this, cheap-karma-shot-saturday?
What is this, cheap-karma-shot-saturday?
I have no problem with Wikipedia links, but some of these today are not going to result in any interesting or meaningful discussion.
Because they're standards!
I love standards. The more the better. Haha.
I love standards. The more the better. Haha.
All my test kit; block gauges, micrometers, 300kg surface plate, engineers levels, sine bars etc are calibrated at 20'c (the industry standard) .. one of the best ways to see the effect temperature has on accuracy is to warm one side of an engineers level in your hand then place it on a surface and watch the bubble move as the temperature equalizes.