I have a string representing the current time: 2015-11-24T19:40:00. How do I parse this string in Javascript to get a Date represented by this string as the LOCAL TIME? Due to some restriction, I cannot use the library moment, but jquery is allowed. I know that someone has asked this question before, but the answer used moment
For example, if I run the script in California, then this string would represent 7PM pacific time, but if I run the script in NY then this string would represent Eastern Time?
I tried the following but Chrome and Firefox give me different results:
var str = "2015-11-24T19:40:00";
var date = new Date(str);
Chrome consumes it as UTC time (Tue Nov 24 2015 11:40:00 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)),
but Firefox consumes it as my local PACIFIC time (Tue Nov 24 2015 19:40:00 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time))
I tried adding "Z" to str, like this var date = new Date(str+"Z");, then both browsers give me UTC time. Is there any similar letter to "Z" which tells all browsers (at least chrome, Firefox and Safari) to parse the string as local time zone?
Parsing of date strings using the Date constructor or Date.parse (which are essentially the same thing) is strongly recommended against.
If Date is called as a function and passed an ISO 8601 format date string without a timezone (such as 2015-11-24T19:40:00), you may get one of the following results:
Pre ES5 implementaitons may treat it as anything, even NaN (such as IE 8)
ES5 compliant implementations will treat it as UTC timezone
ECMAScript 2015 compliant implementations will treat it as local (which is consistent with ISO 8601)
A Date object has a time value which is UTC, and an offset based on system settings. When you send a Date to output, what you see is usually the result of Date.prototype.toString, which is an implementation dependent, human readable string representing the date and time, usually in a timezone based on system settings.
The best way to parse date strings is to do it manually. If you are assured that the format is consistent and valid, then parsing an ISO format string as a local date is as simple as:
/* #param {string} s - an ISO 8001 format date and time string
** with all components, e.g. 2015-11-24T19:40:00
** #returns {Date} - Date instance from parsing the string. May be NaN.
*/
function parseISOLocal(s) {
var b = s.split(/\D/);
return new Date(b[0], b[1]-1, b[2], b[3], b[4], b[5]);
}
document.write(parseISOLocal('2015-11-24T19:40:00'));
Note that parsing of ISO strings using Date.parse only accepts UTC, it does not accept any other timezone designation (noting the above behaviour if it's missing).
A variation on RobG's terrific answer.
Note that this will require that you run bleeding edge JavaScript as
it relies on the arrow notation and spread operator.
function parseDateISOString(s) {
let ds = s.split(/\D/).map(s => parseInt(s));
ds[1] = ds[1] - 1; // adjust month
return new Date(...ds);
}
Note that this doesn't take into account if the date/time given is in any timezone. It will assume local time. You can change new Date for Date.UTC to assume UTC.
There are technical reasons for why you would write you code like this. For example, here we apply the correct number of arguments, with their corresponding expected type. It's true that the Date constructor will turn strings into numbers but what could be happening is that there's a deoptimization taking place where the optimized code is expecting a number but sees a string and takes a slower path. Not a big deal but I try to write my JavaScript to avoid such things. We also won't be indexing outside the bounds of the array if less than 6 components can be found in the string which is also one of those things you can do in JavaScript but it has subtle deoptimization caveats.
Where Date is called as a constructor with more than one argument, the specified arguments represent local time.
I also have a much faster way than using the string.split() because we already know where the numbers are:
return new Date(Number(date.substring(0, 4)), Number(date.substring(5, 7))-1,
Number(date.substring(8, 10)), Number(date.substring(11, 13)),
Number(date.substring(14, 16)), Number(date.substring(17, 19)));
This will work with and/or without the 'T' and 'Z' strings and still has decent performance. I added the explicit Number conversion (faster and better than parseInt) so this also compiles in TypeScript.
Number
Related
I have a string representing the current time: 2015-11-24T19:40:00. How do I parse this string in Javascript to get a Date represented by this string as the LOCAL TIME? Due to some restriction, I cannot use the library moment, but jquery is allowed. I know that someone has asked this question before, but the answer used moment
For example, if I run the script in California, then this string would represent 7PM pacific time, but if I run the script in NY then this string would represent Eastern Time?
I tried the following but Chrome and Firefox give me different results:
var str = "2015-11-24T19:40:00";
var date = new Date(str);
Chrome consumes it as UTC time (Tue Nov 24 2015 11:40:00 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)),
but Firefox consumes it as my local PACIFIC time (Tue Nov 24 2015 19:40:00 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time))
I tried adding "Z" to str, like this var date = new Date(str+"Z");, then both browsers give me UTC time. Is there any similar letter to "Z" which tells all browsers (at least chrome, Firefox and Safari) to parse the string as local time zone?
Parsing of date strings using the Date constructor or Date.parse (which are essentially the same thing) is strongly recommended against.
If Date is called as a function and passed an ISO 8601 format date string without a timezone (such as 2015-11-24T19:40:00), you may get one of the following results:
Pre ES5 implementaitons may treat it as anything, even NaN (such as IE 8)
ES5 compliant implementations will treat it as UTC timezone
ECMAScript 2015 compliant implementations will treat it as local (which is consistent with ISO 8601)
A Date object has a time value which is UTC, and an offset based on system settings. When you send a Date to output, what you see is usually the result of Date.prototype.toString, which is an implementation dependent, human readable string representing the date and time, usually in a timezone based on system settings.
The best way to parse date strings is to do it manually. If you are assured that the format is consistent and valid, then parsing an ISO format string as a local date is as simple as:
/* #param {string} s - an ISO 8001 format date and time string
** with all components, e.g. 2015-11-24T19:40:00
** #returns {Date} - Date instance from parsing the string. May be NaN.
*/
function parseISOLocal(s) {
var b = s.split(/\D/);
return new Date(b[0], b[1]-1, b[2], b[3], b[4], b[5]);
}
document.write(parseISOLocal('2015-11-24T19:40:00'));
Note that parsing of ISO strings using Date.parse only accepts UTC, it does not accept any other timezone designation (noting the above behaviour if it's missing).
A variation on RobG's terrific answer.
Note that this will require that you run bleeding edge JavaScript as
it relies on the arrow notation and spread operator.
function parseDateISOString(s) {
let ds = s.split(/\D/).map(s => parseInt(s));
ds[1] = ds[1] - 1; // adjust month
return new Date(...ds);
}
Note that this doesn't take into account if the date/time given is in any timezone. It will assume local time. You can change new Date for Date.UTC to assume UTC.
There are technical reasons for why you would write you code like this. For example, here we apply the correct number of arguments, with their corresponding expected type. It's true that the Date constructor will turn strings into numbers but what could be happening is that there's a deoptimization taking place where the optimized code is expecting a number but sees a string and takes a slower path. Not a big deal but I try to write my JavaScript to avoid such things. We also won't be indexing outside the bounds of the array if less than 6 components can be found in the string which is also one of those things you can do in JavaScript but it has subtle deoptimization caveats.
Where Date is called as a constructor with more than one argument, the specified arguments represent local time.
I also have a much faster way than using the string.split() because we already know where the numbers are:
return new Date(Number(date.substring(0, 4)), Number(date.substring(5, 7))-1,
Number(date.substring(8, 10)), Number(date.substring(11, 13)),
Number(date.substring(14, 16)), Number(date.substring(17, 19)));
This will work with and/or without the 'T' and 'Z' strings and still has decent performance. I added the explicit Number conversion (faster and better than parseInt) so this also compiles in TypeScript.
Number
I have a string representing the current time: 2015-11-24T19:40:00. How do I parse this string in Javascript to get a Date represented by this string as the LOCAL TIME? Due to some restriction, I cannot use the library moment, but jquery is allowed. I know that someone has asked this question before, but the answer used moment
For example, if I run the script in California, then this string would represent 7PM pacific time, but if I run the script in NY then this string would represent Eastern Time?
I tried the following but Chrome and Firefox give me different results:
var str = "2015-11-24T19:40:00";
var date = new Date(str);
Chrome consumes it as UTC time (Tue Nov 24 2015 11:40:00 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)),
but Firefox consumes it as my local PACIFIC time (Tue Nov 24 2015 19:40:00 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time))
I tried adding "Z" to str, like this var date = new Date(str+"Z");, then both browsers give me UTC time. Is there any similar letter to "Z" which tells all browsers (at least chrome, Firefox and Safari) to parse the string as local time zone?
Parsing of date strings using the Date constructor or Date.parse (which are essentially the same thing) is strongly recommended against.
If Date is called as a function and passed an ISO 8601 format date string without a timezone (such as 2015-11-24T19:40:00), you may get one of the following results:
Pre ES5 implementaitons may treat it as anything, even NaN (such as IE 8)
ES5 compliant implementations will treat it as UTC timezone
ECMAScript 2015 compliant implementations will treat it as local (which is consistent with ISO 8601)
A Date object has a time value which is UTC, and an offset based on system settings. When you send a Date to output, what you see is usually the result of Date.prototype.toString, which is an implementation dependent, human readable string representing the date and time, usually in a timezone based on system settings.
The best way to parse date strings is to do it manually. If you are assured that the format is consistent and valid, then parsing an ISO format string as a local date is as simple as:
/* #param {string} s - an ISO 8001 format date and time string
** with all components, e.g. 2015-11-24T19:40:00
** #returns {Date} - Date instance from parsing the string. May be NaN.
*/
function parseISOLocal(s) {
var b = s.split(/\D/);
return new Date(b[0], b[1]-1, b[2], b[3], b[4], b[5]);
}
document.write(parseISOLocal('2015-11-24T19:40:00'));
Note that parsing of ISO strings using Date.parse only accepts UTC, it does not accept any other timezone designation (noting the above behaviour if it's missing).
A variation on RobG's terrific answer.
Note that this will require that you run bleeding edge JavaScript as
it relies on the arrow notation and spread operator.
function parseDateISOString(s) {
let ds = s.split(/\D/).map(s => parseInt(s));
ds[1] = ds[1] - 1; // adjust month
return new Date(...ds);
}
Note that this doesn't take into account if the date/time given is in any timezone. It will assume local time. You can change new Date for Date.UTC to assume UTC.
There are technical reasons for why you would write you code like this. For example, here we apply the correct number of arguments, with their corresponding expected type. It's true that the Date constructor will turn strings into numbers but what could be happening is that there's a deoptimization taking place where the optimized code is expecting a number but sees a string and takes a slower path. Not a big deal but I try to write my JavaScript to avoid such things. We also won't be indexing outside the bounds of the array if less than 6 components can be found in the string which is also one of those things you can do in JavaScript but it has subtle deoptimization caveats.
Where Date is called as a constructor with more than one argument, the specified arguments represent local time.
I also have a much faster way than using the string.split() because we already know where the numbers are:
return new Date(Number(date.substring(0, 4)), Number(date.substring(5, 7))-1,
Number(date.substring(8, 10)), Number(date.substring(11, 13)),
Number(date.substring(14, 16)), Number(date.substring(17, 19)));
This will work with and/or without the 'T' and 'Z' strings and still has decent performance. I added the explicit Number conversion (faster and better than parseInt) so this also compiles in TypeScript.
Number
I'm trying to convert javascript date strings into date objects. It seems that when I format the strings with slashes, like 2010/05/21, I get the date object I was expecting, but when I format the string with dashes, like 2010-05-21, I get a different date object which seems to refer to the previous day.
The following code illustrates my issue:
var aDate = new Date('2010-05-21')
console.log(aDate.toDateString())
console.log(aDate.toISOString())
console.log('=-=-=-=-=')
var anotherDate = new Date('2010/05/21')
console.log(anotherDate.toDateString())
console.log(anotherDate.toISOString())
The above code produces the following output:
2010-05-21T00:00:00.000Z
Thu May 20 2010
=-=-=-=-=
2010-05-21T06:00:00.000Z
Fri May 21 2010
It seems like part of the issue might be related to timezones, since getting the ISO string of the date objects shows the date objects to be 6 hours apart from each other, but I have no idea why using dashes instead of slashes would cause that. I'm using Google Chrome on MacOS Sierra, in case that's relevant.
2010/05/21 is a non-ISO date format, so support will be browser implementation dependent. Some browsers may reject it, others will accept it but use different time zones. It looks like your browser is parsing 2010/05/21 with your local time zone.
2010-05-21 is in a simplified ISO 8601 format, so ES5+ has specifications for how it must be parsed. In particular, it must assume the UTC time zone.
You can verify that it's using your local time zone by comparing it to how your browser parses an ISO 8601 date and time (which the ES5 specification says must use the local time zone).
var dateNonISO = new Date('2010/05/21');
var dateLocal = new Date('2010-05-21T00:00:00');
var dateUTC = new Date('2010-05-21');
console.log("Non-ISO:", dateNonISO.toISOString());
console.log("ISO Local:", dateLocal.toISOString());
console.log("ISO UTC:", dateUTC.toISOString());
I have a WCF REST service that returns date in below format:
/Date(1401993000000+0530)/
The value of this date on the server is
6/6/2014 12:00:00 AM
I want to parse this in my javascript code in UTC value.
I tried manually removing the "+0530" string and parsing it to date but it gives "Invalid Date".
I also tried adding the timezone offset as per this post but it gives incorrect value.
How can I parse this?
This format is commonly referred to as an "ASP.NET JSON Date" - because it first emerged from the JavaScriptSerializer and DataContractJsonSerializer classes used in ASP.NET and other parts of .NET. However, it was heavily criticized, and ultimately deprecated in favor of the standard ISO 8601 format, which is the default in the Json.Net library used in most modern .NET code. You'll still see it in WCF, and in older versions of ASP.NET MVC.
This format has two main variations:
/Date(1401993000000)/ - A timestamp alone
/Date(1401993000000+0530)/ - A timestamp with an offset
You will occasionally see the forward slashes escaped with backslashes, as in \/Date(1401993000000)\/, depending on how it was generated. This should be tolerated by parsers, but should not be depended upon.
In both formats shown, the timestamp portion is intended to represent the number of milliseconds since the Unix Epoch, which is 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000 UTC.
I say "intended", because it is possible in .NET to have a DateTime with DateTimeKind.Unspecified, which can't possibly be mapped back to UTC. In this case, the serializer will act as if it had DateTimeKind.Local. The output will then reflect the value adjusted to UTC in the computer's local time zone, along with the computer's UTC offset for that point in time. Ideally, you should not rely on this behavior, as you will get different results from computers in different time zones.
When an offset is present in the output string, it is in +HHmm/-HHmm format, with positive values falling East of GMT - the same direction as the ISO 8601 standard. However, unlike ISO 8601, the value portion is not adjusted for that offset. It remains UTC-based.
In other words:
/Date(1401993000000)/ = 2014-06-05T18:30:00Z
/Date(1401993000000+0530)/ = 2014-06-05T18:30:00Z + +0530 = 2014-06-06T00:00:00+05:30
Because of this, the offset portion is extraneous when using this value to create a JavaScript Date object - since a Date object wraps a timestamp in UTC, and has no provision for retaining a provided offset.
You can certainly break out the string into its parts and use them yourself,
but instead consider using Moment.js for parsing this string. It understands the format natively, and can give you back an object that retains knowledge of the offset.
var m = moment.parseZone("/Date(1401993000000+0530)/");
m.format() // "2014-06-06T00:00:00+05:30"
If you were looking for a Date object, you can certainly call m.toDate(). The resulting Date object will have the same UTC timestamp, but due to how the Date object works, any local-time functions will only use the offset of the host environment.
In other words, with output of a Date object, the +0530 part of your input becomes useless. You might have well have parsed /Date(1401993000000)/.
You can use Moment JS, one of the better ways to play with datetime in JavaSCript. Lot of functions
https://momentjs.com/timezone/
See the edited message, without momentjs:
var data = [ {"id":1,"start":"/Date(1401993000000+0530)/"} ];
var myDate = new Date(data[0].start.match(/\d+/)[0] * 1);
myDate = new Date(myDate.getTime() + myDate.getTimezoneOffset() * 60 * 1000);
alert(myDate);
I've seen so many different standards for the JSON date format:
"\"\\/Date(1335205592410)\\/\"" .NET JavaScriptSerializer
"\"\\/Date(1335205592410-0500)\\/\"" .NET DataContractJsonSerializer
"2012-04-23T18:25:43.511Z" JavaScript built-in JSON object
"2012-04-21T18:25:43-05:00" ISO 8601
Which one is the right one? Or best? Is there any sort of standard on this?
JSON itself does not specify how dates should be represented, but JavaScript does.
You should use the format emitted by Date's toJSON method:
2012-04-23T18:25:43.511Z
Here's why:
It's human readable but also succinct
It sorts correctly
It includes fractional seconds, which can help re-establish chronology
It conforms to ISO 8601
ISO 8601 has been well-established internationally for more than a decade
ISO 8601 is endorsed by W3C, RFC3339, and XKCD
That being said, every date library ever written can understand "milliseconds since 1970". So for easy portability, ThiefMaster is right.
JSON does not know anything about dates. What .NET does is a non-standard hack/extension.
I would use a format that can be easily converted to a Date object in JavaScript, i.e. one that can be passed to new Date(...). The easiest and probably most portable format is the timestamp containing milliseconds since 1970.
There is no right format; The JSON specification does not specify a format for exchanging dates which is why there are so many different ways to do it.
The best format is arguably a date represented in ISO 8601 format (see Wikipedia); it is a well known and widely used format and can be handled across many different languages, making it very well suited for interoperability. If you have control over the generated json, for example, you provide data to other systems in json format, choosing 8601 as the date interchange format is a good choice.
If you do not have control over the generated json, for example, you are the consumer of json from several different existing systems, the best way of handling this is to have a date parsing utility function to handle the different formats expected.
When in doubt simply go to the javascript web console of a modern browser by pressing F12 (Ctrl+Shift+K in Firefox) and write the following:
new Date().toISOString()
Will output:
"2019-07-04T13:33:03.969Z"
Ta-da!!
From RFC 7493 (The I-JSON Message Format ):
I-JSON stands for either Internet JSON or Interoperable JSON, depending on who you ask.
Protocols often contain data items that are designed to contain
timestamps or time durations. It is RECOMMENDED that all such data
items be expressed as string values in ISO 8601 format, as specified
in RFC 3339, with the additional restrictions that uppercase rather
than lowercase letters be used, that the timezone be included not
defaulted, and that optional trailing seconds be included even when
their value is "00". It is also RECOMMENDED that all data items
containing time durations conform to the "duration" production in
Appendix A of RFC 3339, with the same additional restrictions.
Just for reference I've seen this format used:
Date.UTC(2017,2,22)
It works with JSONP which is supported by the $.getJSON() function. Not sure I would go so far as to recommend this approach... just throwing it out there as a possibility because people are doing it this way.
FWIW: Never use seconds since epoch in a communication protocol, nor milliseconds since epoch, because these are fraught with danger thanks to the randomized implementation of leap seconds (you have no idea whether sender and receiver both properly implement UTC leap seconds).
Kind of a pet hate, but many people believe that UTC is just the new name for GMT -- wrong! If your system does not implement leap seconds then you are using GMT (often called UTC despite being incorrect). If you do fully implement leap seconds you really are using UTC. Future leap seconds cannot be known; they get published by the IERS as necessary and require constant updates. If you are running a system that attempts to implement leap seconds but contains and out-of-date reference table (more common than you might think) then you have neither GMT, nor UTC, you have a wonky system pretending to be UTC.
These date counters are only compatible when expressed in a broken down format (y, m, d, etc). They are NEVER compatible in an epoch format. Keep that in mind.
"2014-01-01T23:28:56.782Z"
The date is represented in a standard and sortable format that represents a UTC time (indicated by the Z). ISO 8601 also supports time zones by replacing the Z with + or – value for the timezone offset:
"2014-02-01T09:28:56.321-10:00"
There are other variations of the timezone encoding in the ISO 8601 spec, but the –10:00 format is the only TZ format that current JSON parsers support. In general it’s best to use the UTC based format (Z) unless you have a specific need for figuring out the time zone in which the date was produced (possible only in server side generation).
NB:
var date = new Date();
console.log(date); // Wed Jan 01 2014 13:28:56 GMT-
1000 (Hawaiian Standard Time)
var json = JSON.stringify(date);
console.log(json); // "2014-01-01T23:28:56.782Z"
To tell you that's the preferred way even though JavaScript doesn't have a standard format for it
// JSON encoded date
var json = "\"2014-01-01T23:28:56.782Z\"";
var dateStr = JSON.parse(json);
console.log(dateStr); // 2014-01-01T23:28:56.782Z
JSON itself has no date format, it does not care how anyone stores dates. However, since this question is tagged with javascript, I assume you want to know how to store javascript dates in JSON. You can just pass in a date to the JSON.stringify method, and it will use Date.prototype.toJSON by default, which in turns uses Date.prototype.toISOString (MDN on Date.toJSON):
const json = JSON.stringify(new Date());
const parsed = JSON.parse(json); //2015-10-26T07:46:36.611Z
const date = new Date(parsed); // Back to date object
I also found it useful to use the reviver parameter of JSON.parse (MDN on JSON.parse) to automatically convert ISO strings back to javascript dates whenever I read JSON strings.
const isoDatePattern = new RegExp(/\d{4}-[01]\d-[0-3]\dT[0-2]\d:[0-5]\d:[0-5]\d\.\d+([+-][0-2]\d:[0-5]\d|Z)/);
const obj = {
a: 'foo',
b: new Date(1500000000000) // Fri Jul 14 2017, etc...
}
const json = JSON.stringify(obj);
// Convert back, use reviver function:
const parsed = JSON.parse(json, (key, value) => {
if (typeof value === 'string' && value.match(isoDatePattern)){
return new Date(value); // isostring, so cast to js date
}
return value; // leave any other value as-is
});
console.log(parsed.b); // // Fri Jul 14 2017, etc...
The prefered way is using 2018-04-23T18:25:43.511Z...
The picture below shows why this is the prefered way:
So as you see Date has a native Method toJSON, which return in this format and can be easily converted to Date again...
In Sharepoint 2013, getting data in JSON there is no format to convert date into date only format, because in that date should be in ISO format
yourDate.substring(0,10)
This may be helpful for you
I believe that the best format for universal interoperability is not the ISO-8601 string, but rather the format used by EJSON:
{ "myDateField": { "$date" : <ms-since-epoch> } }
As described here: https://docs.meteor.com/api/ejson.html
Benefits
Parsing performance: If you store dates as ISO-8601 strings, this is great if you are expecting a date value under that particular field, but if you have a system which must determine value types without context, you're parsing every string for a date format.
No Need for Date Validation: You need not worry about validation and verification of the date. Even if a string matches ISO-8601 format, it may not be a real date; this can never happen with an EJSON date.
Unambiguous Type Declaration: as far as generic data systems go, if you wanted to store an ISO string as a string in one case, and a real system date in another, generic systems adopting the ISO-8601 string format will not allow this, mechanically (without escape tricks or similar awful solutions).
Conclusion
I understand that a human-readable format (ISO-8601 string) is helpful and more convenient for 80% of use cases, and indeed no-one should ever be told not to store their dates as ISO-8601 strings if that's what their applications understand, but for a universally accepted transport format which should guarantee certain values to for sure be dates, how can we allow for ambiguity and need for so much validation?
it is work for me with parse Server
{
"ContractID": "203-17-DC0101-00003-10011",
"Supplier":"Sample Co., Ltd",
"Value":12345.80,
"Curency":"USD",
"StartDate": {
"__type": "Date",
"iso": "2017-08-22T06:11:00.000Z"
}
}
There is only one correct answer to this and most systems get it wrong. Number of milliseconds since epoch, aka a 64 bit integer. Time Zone is a UI concern and has no business in the app layer or db layer. Why does your db care what time zone something is, when you know it's going to store it as a 64 bit integer then do the transformation calculations.
Strip out the extraneous bits and just treat dates as numbers up to the UI. You can use simple arithmetic operators to do queries and logic.
The following code has worked for me. This code will print date in DD-MM-YYYY format.
DateValue=DateValue.substring(6,8)+"-"+DateValue.substring(4,6)+"-"+DateValue.substring(0,4);
else, you can also use:
DateValue=DateValue.substring(0,4)+"-"+DateValue.substring(4,6)+"-"+DateValue.substring(6,8);
I think that really depends on the use case. In many cases it might be more beneficial to use a proper object model (instead of rendering the date to a string), like so:
{
"person" :
{
"name" : {
"first": "Tom",
"middle": "M",
...
}
"dob" : {
"year": 2012,
"month": 4,
"day": 23,
"hour": 18,
"minute": 25,
"second": 43,
"timeZone": "America/New_York"
}
}
}
Admittedly this is more verbose than RFC 3339 but:
it's human readable as well
it implements a proper object model (as in OOP, as far as JSON permits it)
it supports time zones (not just the UTC offset at the given date and time)
it can support smaller units like milliseconds, nanoseconds, ... or simply fractional seconds
it doesn't require a separate parsing step (to parse the date-time string), the JSON parser will do everything for you
easy creation with any date-time framework or implementation in any language
can easily be extended to support other calendar scales (Hebrew, Chinese, Islamic ...) and eras (AD, BC, ...)
it's year 10000 safe ;-) (RFC 3339 isn't)
supports all-day dates and floating times (Javascript's Date.toJSON() doesn't)
I don't think that correct sorting (as noted by funroll for RFC 3339) is a feature that's really needed when serializing a date to JSON. Also that's only true for date-times having the same time zone offset.