Date & Time: Representations For Information Interchange

Loading
loading...

Date & Time: Representations For Information Interchange

August 1, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , , , , , , , ,
No Comments

“A Philosopher Lecturing on the Orrery” | Joseph Wright (1766)

Most nations follow the day/month/year format (07/01/19 for January 7, 2019, for example), but the United States adheres to its own format of month/day/year (1/7/19 or 1/7/2019).   The potential for misinterpreting dates across national boundaries is the logic for ISO 8601:2019 – Data Elements And Interchange Formats – Information Interchange – Representation Of Dates And Times, the ISO format for dates represents year, month, and day from the largest unit to the smallest, most specific unit of time.  The ISO date format is the date format used in SQL and is the default date setting on many computers.

ISO 8601-1:2019 Date And Time – Representations For Information Interchange – Part 1: Basic Rules

CLICK ON IMAGE FOR INTERACTIVE MAP


More

Time and Date

How the ISO Date Format Tells Today

ISO Date Format

Date and time formats used in HTML

Making Greenwich the centre of the world

Ædificare & Utilization

August 1, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Its been 20 years since we began following educational facilities construction activity.  Starting this month we will examine federal government data together with the best available data about space utilization to enlighten our response to the perfectly reasonable question: “Are we over-building or under-building or building ineffectively”.  Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

United States: Schools of Architecture

The Society for College and University Planning (Ann Arbor, Michigan)

National Center for Education Statistics

The Financial Impact of Architectural Design: Balancing Aesthetics and Budget in Modern Construction

 

Homeschooling

2022 International Existing Building Code 

  • University College London

As reported by the US Department of Commerce Census Bureau the value of construction put in place by May 2025 by the US education industry proceeded at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $135.970 billionThis number does not include renovation for projects under 50,000 square feet and new construction in university-affiliated health care delivery enterprises.   Reports are released two months after calendar month.  The complete report is available at the link below:

MONTHLY CONSTRUCTION SPENDING June 2025 (released two months after calendar month)


This spend makes the US education facilities industry (which includes colleges, universities, technical/vocational and K-12 schools, most university-affiliated medical research and healthcare delivery enterprises, etc.) the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States after commercial property; and fairly close.  For perspective consider total public + private construction ranked according to the tabulation most recently released:

$136.9590 billion| Education Facilities

$156.919 billion | Power

$68.968 billion | Healthcare

Keep in mind that inflation figures into the elevated dollar figures.  Overall — including construction, energy, custodial services, furnishings, security. etc., — the non-instructional spend plus the construction spend of the US education facilities is running at a rate of about $300 – $500 billion per year.

LIVE: A selection of construction cameras at  US schools, colleges and universities

Architectural Billings

We typically pick through the new data set; looking for clues relevant to real asset spend decisions.  Finally, we encourage the education facilities industry to contribute to the accuracy of these monthly reports by responding the US Census Bureau’s data gathering contractors.

Reconstruction of Ancient Agora

 

As surely as people are born, grow wealthy and die with extra cash,

there will be a home for that cash to sustain their memory and to steer

the cultural heritage of the next generation in beautiful settings.

More

National Center for Educational Statistics

AIA: Billings Index shows but remains strong May 2022

National Center for Education Statistics

Sightlines: Capital Investment College Facilities

OxBlue: Time-Lapse Construction Cameras for Education

Architectural Billing Index

IBISWorld Education Sector

US Census Bureau Form F-33 Survey of School System Finances

American School & University

Global Consistency in Presenting Construction & Life Cycle Costs

Carnegie Classifications

United States Standards System

August 1, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Essential Requirements
Your 2025 Guide to ANSI’s Community Resources

S. Joe Bhatia at the University of Michigan Ross School of Business | ANSI Company Member Forum, May 2016

CLICK ON IMAGE FOR COMPLETE PRESENTATION

With many non-profit organizations also challenged by the pandemic we are likely to see fewer experts at technology, finance and management gatherings where leading practice is discovered and promulgated.  That does not mean that many gatherings will not be offloaded onto the internet but, with fewer paid experts involved, one wonders whether there will be fewer unpaid experts — or will there be more unpaid experts?  We shall see.

Since the United States federal government can print money it is likely that more decision-making will be drawn back to Washington D.C.  — where the money is.  The likelihood that we shall see greater federal control over education facility industry originating at the federal level inspires a revisit of the United States standards system.   The National Institute of Standards and Technology is the oversight agency and the American National Standards Institute is the private non-profit organization that oversees the development of voluntary consensus standards for products, services, processes, systems, and personnel in the United States.

To understand ideal balance in the US standards system See § 2.3 ANSI Essential Requirements: Due process requirements for American National Standards

 


FROM OUR ARCHIVE:

Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent

August 1, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Department of Justice | June 24, 2004

The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague.

In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law tradition and how prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any one of us, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior.

The volume of federal crimes in recent decades has increased well beyond the statute books and into the morass of the Code of Federal Regulations, handing federal prosecutors an additional trove of vague and exceedingly complex and technical prohibitions to stick on their hapless targets.

The dangers spelled out in Three Felonies a Day do not apply solely to “white collar criminals,” state and local politicians, and professionals. No social class or profession is safe from this troubling form of social control by the executive branch, and nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional democracy hangs in the balance.

Preview

Related:

Mens rea

Have you been certified to do that work?

15 USC 4301: Definitions Text contains those laws in effect on February 9, 2025: From Title 15-COMMERCE AND TRADECHAPTER 69-COOPERATIVE RESEARCH

See Also: Cato Institute

Credegrees

Food Safety

August 1, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com

No Comments

Overdoor, France, ca. 1825; | Smithsonian Design Museum

Education communities have significant food safety responsibilities.  Risk gets pushed around global food service counterparties; a drama in itself and one that requires coverage in a separate blog post.*

Since 2013 we have been following the development of food safety standards; among them ANSI/NSF 2: Food Equipment one of a constellation of NSF food safety titles whose provisions cover bakery, cafeteria, kitchen, and pantry units and other food handling and processing equipment such as tables and components, counters, hoods, shelves, and sinks.  The purpose of this Standard is to establish minimum food protection and sanitation requirements for the materials, design, fabrication, construction, and performance of food handling and processing equipment.

It is a relatively stable standard; developed to support conformance revenue for products.  A new landing page seems to have emerged in recent months:

https://www.nsf.org/testing/food

You may be enlightened by the concepts running through this standard as can be seen on a past, pre-pandemic agenda:

NSF 2 Food Safety 2019 Meeting Packet – Final Draft

NSF 2 Food Safety 2019 Meeting Summary – August 21-22 Ann Arbor NSF Headquarters

NSF 2 Food Equipment Fabrication Agenda – FEF – TG – 2021-01-12

Not trivial agendas with concepts that cut across several disciplines involving product manufacture, installation, operation and maintenance.  We find a very strong influence of organizations such as Aramark and Sodexo.   More on that in a separate post.

Ranchview High School Cafeteria / Irving, Texas

This committee – along with several other joint committees –meets frequently online.  If you wish to participate, and receive access to documents that explain the scope and scale of NSF food safety standards, please contact Allan Rose, (734) 827-3817, arose@nsf.org.   NSF International welcomes guests/observers to nearly all of its standards-setting technical committees.   We expect another online meeting hosted by this committee any day now.

Keep in mind that all NSF International titles are on the standing agenda of our Nourriture (Food) colloquia; open to everyone.  See our CALENDAR for the next meeting.

University of Indiana

Issue: [13-113] [15-126]

Category: Facility Asset Management, Healthcare, Residence Hall, Athletics

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Tracey Artley, Keith Koster, Richard Robben

*See “Food Safety Risk Management: Evidence-Informed Policies and Decisions, Considering Multiple Factors, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations”


LEARN MORE:

ANSI Blog | Changes to NSF 2 Food Safety Equipment Standard

NSF International Food Safety 2018 Meeting Summary – 2018-08-22 – Final Draft

2017 Food Code | US Food & Drug Administration

Hygiene Requirements For The Design Of Meat And Poultry Processing Equipment

ARCHIVE: NSF 2 Food Safety

Storm Shelters

August 1, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , ,
No Comments

2024 GROUP A PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE I-CODES

Latest News and Documents

“Landscape between Storms” 1841 Auguste Renoir

 

When is it ever NOT storm season somewhere in the United States; with several hundred schools, colleges and universities in the path of them? Hurricanes also spawn tornadoes. This title sets the standard of care for safety, resilience and recovery when education community structures are used for shelter and recovery.  The most recently published edition of the joint work results of the International Code Council and the ASCE Structural Engineering Institute SEI-7 is linked below:

2020 ICC/NSSA 500 Standard for the Design and Construction of Storm Shelters.

Given the historic tornados in the American Midwest this weekend, its relevance is plain.  From the project prospectus:

The objective of this Standard is to provide technical design and performance criteria that will facilitate and promote the design, construction, and installation of safe, reliable, and economical storm shelters to protect the public. It is intended that this Standard be used by design professionals; storm shelter designers, manufacturers, and constructors; building officials; and emergency management personnel and government officials to ensure that storm shelters provide a consistently high level of protection to the sheltered public.

This project runs roughly in tandem with the ASCE Structural Engineering Institute SEI-17 which has recently updated its content management system and presented challenges to anyone who attempts to find the content where it used to be before the website overhaul.    In the intervening time, we direct stakeholders to the link to actual text (above) and remind education facility managers and their architectural/engineering consultants that the ICC Code Development process is open to everyone.

The ICC receives public response to proposed changes to titles in its catalog at the link below:

Standards Public Forms

2024/2025/2026 ICC CODE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE

You are encouraged to communicate with Kimberly Paarlberg (kpaarlberg@iccsafe.org) for detailed, up to the moment information.  When the content is curated by ICC staff it is made available at the link below:

ICC cdpACCESS

We maintain this title on the agenda of our periodic Disaster colloquia which approach this title from the point of view of education community facility managers who collaborate with structual engineers, architects and emergency management functionaries..   See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting, open to everyone.

Readings:

FEMA: Highlights of ICC 500-2020

ICC 500-2020 Standard and Commentary: ICC/NSSA Design and Construction of Storm Shelters

IEEE: City Geospatial Dashboard: IoT and Big Data Analytics for Geospatial Solutions Provider in Disaster Management

 

Student Accommodation

August 1, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com

No Comments

ENR (December 7, 2023) University of Michigan Signs P3 for $631M Student Housing Project

Harvard University Dormitory Room | Smithsonian Museum | Thomas Warren Sears Collection

Today we break down public consultation notices for literature that sets the standard of care for the safety and sustainability of student housing in K-12 prep schools, colleges and universities.  We deal with off-campus housing in a separate session because it involves local safety and sustainability regulations; most of which are derived from residential housing codes and standards.

Monograph: The Case for Campus Housing

Off-Campus Housing

The topic cuts across many disciplines and standards setting organization bibliographies. We usually set our bearing with the following titles:

2021 International Building Code: Section 310 Residential Group R-2 + related titles such as the IFC, IMC, IPC, IECC

2021 Fire Code: Chapter 6 Classification of Occupancy  + related titles such as NFPA 70B, NFPA 72 and NFPA 110

2023 National Electrical Code: Articles 210-230 + related Articles 110 and 410

ASHRAE 90.1 Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings: Annex G

Like any other classification of real property the average cost for room and board for a public university student dormitory depends on several factors such as the location of the university, the type of dormitory, and the meal plan options.  According to the College Board, the average cost of room and board for the 2021-2022 academic year at a public four-year in-state institution was $11,620. However, this figure can range from around $7,000 to $16,000 or more depending on the specific institution and its location.   It’s important to note that this average cost only includes the basic meal plan and standard dormitory room. Students may also have additional costs for a larger or more luxurious dorm room, a premium meal plan, or other expenses such as laundry or parking fees.   

According to ring Rider Levett Bucknall, a global property and construction consultancy firm, the average construction cost for a student housing facility in the United States in 2021 was around $202 per square foot. However, this figure can range from around $150 to $300 per square foot or more depending on the specific project.  Life cycle cost for new facilities with tricked out net-zero gadgets is hard to come by at the moment.

Because money flows freely through this domain we examine scalable densities and the nature of money flow patterns; partially tracked by the Electronic Municipal Market Access always on the standing agenda of our Finance colloquium.

More

National Institute of Standards & Technology: The Character of Residential Cooktop Fires

Deserted College Dorms Sow Trouble for $14 Billion in Muni Bonds

Dormitory, Fraternity, Sorority and Barrack Structure Fires

Here are a few pros and cons of private sector construction of university-owned student housing:

Pros:

  1. Increased housing availability: Private sector developers may be able to build more student housing units than a university could build on its own, which can help to alleviate the shortage of on-campus housing for students.
  2. Faster construction: Private developers may be able to complete construction projects faster than universities, which can help to reduce the amount of time that students must wait for new housing options.
  3. Reduced financial burden on the university: The cost of building and maintaining student housing can be significant, and private sector developers may be willing to bear some of these costs. This can help to reduce the financial burden on the university and free up resources for other initiatives.
  4. Professional management: Private developers may have more experience managing large housing projects and may be able to provide more professional management services than a university could provide on its own.

Cons:

  1. Higher costs for students: Private developers may charge higher rents than a university would charge for student housing, which can make housing less affordable for some students.
  2. Reduced university control: Private developers may have different priorities than a university would have when it comes to building and managing student housing. This can lead to a reduced level of control for the university over housing quality, management, and policies.
  3. Potential conflicts of interest: Private developers may be more focused on making a profit than on meeting the needs of students or the university, which can create potential conflicts of interest.
  4. Less transparency: Private developers may not be subject to the same level of transparency and accountability as a university would be when it comes to housing policies, decision-making processes, and financial management.

It’s important to note that these pros and cons may vary depending on the specific circumstances and context of each individual university and private sector partnership.


Gallery: Off-Campus Accommodation

Food Code 2022

August 1, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

“Fall Plowing” | Gant Wood (1880)

Food safety is an obvious priority for education communities, given the prevalence of school lunch programs, student residence meal services, university-affiliated hospitals, athletic and entertainment event concessions — too many to count.   We find food services in the interstitial spaces of traditional educational occupancies such as libraries and student recreation centers.  Many land grant colleges and universities were founded to develop agricultural programs for local food supply and safety.  It is fair to say that there are far more people involved in food preparation and delivery services than there are skilled tradespersons such as electricians, plumbers, carpenters, software programmers, etc.

The food supply chain is an essential feature of education community infrastructure so we track the literature of food safety and sustainability here; starting with one of its foundational documents with the force of law.

FOOD CODE 2022

Southern Ice Cream

July 31, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , , ,
No Comments

Standards Mississippi

University of Mississippi Financial Statement 2023: $1.207B

US Department of Agriculture | § 58.2825 United States Standard for ice cream.

Southern ice cream often differs from ice cream in other regions of the U.S. in several ways, reflecting regional tastes, ingredients, and traditions:

  1. Flavors and Ingredients:
    • Pecans and Pralines: Southern ice cream frequently incorporates pecans and pralines, which are popular in the region.
    • Peaches: Georgia is known for its peaches, so peach-flavored ice cream is a Southern staple.
    • Sweet Tea and Bourbon: These flavors are inspired by Southern beverages and can be found in ice creams.
    • Buttermilk: Buttermilk ice cream has a tangy flavor and is a nod to traditional Southern cooking.
  2. Style and Texture:
    • Custard Base: Southern ice cream often uses a custard base, which includes egg yolks, giving it a richer and creamier texture compared to the typical Philadelphia-style ice cream that uses a simpler cream and sugar base.
    • Churned at Home: Traditional Southern ice cream is often made using hand-cranked ice cream makers, producing a different texture and incorporating more air, which can make it lighter and fluffier.
  3. Historical Influence:
    • Cultural Heritage: The South’s diverse cultural heritage influences its ice cream, with recipes passed down through generations and reflecting African American, Native American, and European influences.
  4. Popular Brands and Shops:
    • Regional Brands: Brands like Blue Bell, which originated in Texas, are particularly popular in the South and known for their classic Southern flavors.
    • Local Shops: Small, local ice cream parlors in the South often offer unique, homemade flavors that highlight regional ingredients and traditions.

These differences highlight the South’s rich culinary traditions and how they extend even to sweet treats like ice cream.

University of Mississippi | Lafayette County

William Faulkner Home: Rowan Oak

Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
error: Content is protected !!
Skip to content