[3.7] bpo-33400: Clarified documentation to indicate no strict adherence to ISO 8601. (GH-6702) by miss-islington · Pull Request #6704

[3.7] bpo-33400: Clarified documentation to indicate no strict adherence to ISO 8601. (GH-6702) by miss-islington · Pull Request #6704 · python/cpython

… ISO 8601. (pythonGH-6702)

(cherry picked from commit c4994dc)

Co-authored-by: Vinay Sajip <vinay_sajip@yahoo.co.uk>

@vsajip: Backport status check is done, and it's a success ✅ .

		:func:`time.strftime` to format the creation time of the
		record. Otherwise, the ISO8601 format is used. The resulting string is
		returned.
		record. Otherwise, an ISO8601-like (or RDC 3339-like) format is used. The

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

RFC ?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well spotted, thanks! Will correct.

You can use the reStructuredText markup: :rfc:`3339`.

		The default format for date/time display (shown above) is ISO8601. If you need
		more control over the formatting of the date/time, provide a datefmt
		argument to ``basicConfig``, as in this example::
		The default format for date/time display (shown above) is like ISO8601 or

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is unnecessary. It is not "like" ISO8601, it is ISO 8601.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For now, I will sync the changes to be in line with the other branches, but won't close the issue. I think it's best just to state what the format is, make a reference to RFC 3339, and leave it at that. I will address this in a further update.