Skip to content
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

1996-12-19T should not be a valid ISO8601 string #20

Open
francois-normandin opened this issue Jan 3, 2025 · 1 comment
Open

1996-12-19T should not be a valid ISO8601 string #20

francois-normandin opened this issue Jan 3, 2025 · 1 comment

Comments

@francois-normandin
Copy link
Member

referencing #17 , the time designator cannot be alone and not followed by an empty time string.
We can possibly accept it with strict = false as it is unambiguously a date, but then, should time be inferred as 00:00:00?

@ciozi137
Copy link
Collaborator

ciozi137 commented Jan 3, 2025

@francois-normandin:

referencing #17 , the time designator cannot be alone and not followed by an empty time string

I agree with your assessment. It is also nonsensical that a time designator [T] would be included in a date-only string. I think it should not be a valid string - even if strict==false.

We can possibly accept it with strict = false as it is unambiguously a date, but then, should time be inferred as 00:00:00?

In the case of date string to timestamp, good question what should be the default time, presumably the developer is planning to ignore it anyway. I think 00:00:00 is reasonable.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants