[uf-dev] The correct format of a ISO date

Toby A Inkster mail at tobyinkster.co.uk
Fri May 23 14:13:31 PDT 2008

Scott Reynen wrote:

> In addition to being more specific than the previous recommendation,
> this one applies RFC 2119 "should" to the microformat itself rather
> than implementors of the microformat, which doesn't make much sense.
> Further confusing matters, individual microformats make no mention of
> RFC 3339, referring only to ISO 8601.

I raised this very issue a couple of months ago:

In short the datetime design pattern says that microformats making  
use of it must define a profile (i.e. subset) of ISO 8601 that is  
supported. But none do.

I've tried to address this in my experimental hCalendar 1.1 spec:

Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail at tobyinkster.co.uk>

More information about the microformats-dev mailing list