>> You know that YYYY-MM-DD is the alternate format and it doesn't work in certain languages in SQL Server. You also know that the primary ISO format is YYYYMMDD. Supposedly, you helped write the standard so why do you continue to publish bad information? <<
Please quit misquoting me. What I keep saying is that the only format allowed in th ANSI/ISO standards for the SQL language is the YYYY-MM-DD . This is the only format in ANSI/ISO standard for SQL. That's the only standard I voted on or worked with. I do not question that there are other ISO – 8601 date formats. In particular, I really like the week within year format (really handy for weekly computations) and the ordinal date format (handy for simple date counts within the year).
Yes, there are national conventions (they are usually not international standards) which can get pretty weird. My favorite example is the three-letter month abbreviations in Czech and Slovak. In spite of having been in the same country for a long time, these language groups use either the Christian month names or the traditional Slavic month names. They are nothing alike.
The reasons we decided to stick with one and only one ISO standard are:
1) it is language independent
2) the character string sorts correctly
3) it can be parsed separately from either an integer or another kind of character string. The dashes make the regular expiration fairly simple to parse. This is why we rejected YYYYMMDD string format.
Jeff, I would assume by now you have noticed that even Microsoft is defaulting to this standard in their new temporal data types.
Please post DDL and follow ANSI/ISO standards when asking for help.