Comments on: All content needs dates http://www.allenpike.com/2009/all-content-needs-dates/ Allen Pike on gidgets and gazmos. Tue, 07 Feb 2012 01:30:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Allen http://www.allenpike.com/2009/all-content-needs-dates/comment-page-1/#comment-3377 Allen Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:51:38 +0000 http://www.antipode.ca/?p=586#comment-3377 I think for article pages, the year is the most important thing. Not only do I highlight that part of the date, but my article URLs include the year. Some people include the full date in their URLs, but I have no idea why this became a standard. I think for article pages, the year is the most important thing. Not only do I highlight that part of the date, but my article URLs include the year. Some people include the full date in their URLs, but I have no idea why this became a standard.

]]> By: Dan http://www.allenpike.com/2009/all-content-needs-dates/comment-page-1/#comment-3375 Dan Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:32:16 +0000 http://www.antipode.ca/?p=586#comment-3375 What's more interesting is I'd like to move to a wider format, if only to make code listings neater. What’s more interesting is I’d like to move to a wider format, if only to make code listings neater.

]]> By: Dan http://www.allenpike.com/2009/all-content-needs-dates/comment-page-1/#comment-3374 Dan Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:31:36 +0000 http://www.antipode.ca/?p=586#comment-3374 I have no dates on my pages whatsoever, for similar reasons to the original quote. However, I'm swayed by having a date solely for the purposes of determining continued validity. Maybe I'll just provide a year? I have no dates on my pages whatsoever, for similar reasons to the original quote. However, I’m swayed by having a date solely for the purposes of determining continued validity. Maybe I’ll just provide a year?

]]> By: Bruce http://www.allenpike.com/2009/all-content-needs-dates/comment-page-1/#comment-3360 Bruce Sun, 08 Feb 2009 00:04:40 +0000 http://www.antipode.ca/?p=586#comment-3360 I think most meta-data is overrated, at least in the context of weblog posts. It can be distracting if not applied subtly, and can represent a disturbing amount of text on a page (compared to actual content). Post dates should go somewhere, but most weblogs pay far too much attention to them (and too little to the actual content). I think most meta-data is overrated, at least in the context of weblog posts. It can be distracting if not applied subtly, and can represent a disturbing amount of text on a page (compared to actual content). Post dates should go somewhere, but most weblogs pay far too much attention to them (and too little to the actual content).

]]> By: Steven Fisher http://www.allenpike.com/2009/all-content-needs-dates/comment-page-1/#comment-3357 Steven Fisher Fri, 06 Feb 2009 21:59:09 +0000 http://www.antipode.ca/?p=586#comment-3357 Relative dates are perfectly reasonable in a list, agreed. Mail is awesome this way, showing different detail dates if there's limited space. But "Last updated: about a week ago" is isolation ALWAYS sucks. :) Relative dates are perfectly reasonable in a list, agreed. Mail is awesome this way, showing different detail dates if there’s limited space.

But “Last updated: about a week ago” is isolation ALWAYS sucks. :)

]]> By: Allen Pike http://www.allenpike.com/2009/all-content-needs-dates/comment-page-1/#comment-3355 Allen Pike Thu, 05 Feb 2009 09:43:41 +0000 http://www.antipode.ca/?p=586#comment-3355 I think relative dates are good sometimes. The biggest win is with very recent times - for comments on iWork.com we do Today, Yesterday, Date, then Date with Year as time passes. In situations where you're seeing a lot of data (mail for example) they're more appropriate than when you're looking at one value (a single article for example). I think relative dates are good sometimes. The biggest win is with very recent times – for comments on iWork.com we do Today, Yesterday, Date, then Date with Year as time passes. In situations where you’re seeing a lot of data (mail for example) they’re more appropriate than when you’re looking at one value (a single article for example).

]]> By: Steven Fisher http://www.allenpike.com/2009/all-content-needs-dates/comment-page-1/#comment-3354 Steven Fisher Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:46:11 +0000 http://www.antipode.ca/?p=586#comment-3354 Didn't I have to convince you once while you were here that relative dates sucked? ("Last updated: about a week ago.") :) Didn’t I have to convince you once while you were here that relative dates sucked? (“Last updated: about a week ago.”) :)

]]>