Timestamp no work
-
Ok, this has been bugging me a lot and here’s been a final straw a bit ago when I read a post by someone saying that something was happening on a specific date and I didn’t know how close the post was to that date because it simply read “2 years ago”. So what the fuck? Please bring back the real timestamp for posts. The “ago” thing is hideous, misleading and outright stupid. It’s maybe ok for the “x minutes ago” scenario, maybe even “x hours ago”, but to do this for days/months/years is retarded.
Case in point:
-
@kt_ Hover over it; the actual timestamp pops up.
-
.timeago:before { content: attr(title); font-size: 11.9px; } .timeago { font-size: 0; }
-
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
It’s maybe ok for the “x minutes ago” scenario, maybe even “x hours ago”, but to do this for days/months/years is retarded.
I’d say it works well for anything that happened within the last few days. If it says “29 September” you have to think, “When was that again?” but I agree that “1 year 12 months ago” (as I saw on another forum recently) is silly for more than just the obvious reason.
The question is: what’s the best cut-off point? Yesterday? Two days ago? A week ago?
-
@gurth An approach I've seen (not sure where) is:
- Less than 12 hours ago:
14:27
- Other timestamps since midnight today:
Today 2:27
- Other timestamps yesterday:
Yesterday 14:27
- Other timestamps: Use the date.
21 September 2017, 14:27
You could also include
Last Tuesday 14:27
. You might drop the year (if less than, say, 6 months ago) or the time (rarely relevant more than a week ago, can be delegated to mouseover).
- Less than 12 hours ago:
-
These were a handful of hours apart.
-
@gurth said in Timestamp no work:
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
It’s maybe ok for the “x minutes ago” scenario, maybe even “x hours ago”, but to do this for days/months/years is retarded.
I’d say it works well for anything that happened within the last few days. If it says “29 September” you have to think, “When was that again?” but I agree that “1 year 12 months ago” (as I saw on another forum recently) is silly for more than just the obvious reason.
The question is: what’s the best cut-off point? Yesterday? Two days ago? A week ago?
I don’t think we should be doing cut-offs, just show the full timestamp.
-
@anotherusername said in Timestamp no work:
.timeago:before { content: attr(title); font-size: 11.9px; } .timeago { font-size: 0; }
This worked. Thanks!
-
Then, of course, there's perhaps the silliest timestamp of them all:
-
Admins can set it to go to normal date/time after a certain number of days. Any suggestions?
-
@ben_lubar said in Timestamp no work:
Admins can set it to go to normal date/time after a certain number of days. Any suggestions?
Three weeks.
-
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
I don’t think we should be doing cut-offs, just show the full timestamp.
Whereas I do think that relative time indicators are useful, just not if they’re too long ago. (Though the “One month later” etc. ones in the middle of threads do seem useful even if they say “One decade later” or something.)
-
I like the current system; fake timestamps by default, hover to reveal the real timestamp.
-
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
I like the current system; fake timestamps by default, hover to reveal the real timestamp.
Unless you're on mobile, then no hover for you!
Though I wonder, how difficult is it to signal to the browser alt text for those who long-press a link? If the timestamp were presented that way maybe it wouldn't be so bad...
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
I like the current system; fake timestamps by default, hover to reveal the real timestamp.
Unless you're on mobile, then no hover for you!
Though I wonder, how difficult is it to signal to the browser alt text for those who long-press a link? If the timestamp were presented that way maybe it wouldn't be so bad...
Can't be that difficult, XKCD does it.
-
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
I like the current system; fake timestamps by default, hover to reveal the real timestamp.
Unless you're on mobile, then no hover for you!
Though I wonder, how difficult is it to signal to the browser alt text for those who long-press a link? If the timestamp were presented that way maybe it wouldn't be so bad...
Can't be that difficult, XKCD does it.
Pull requests accepted?
Though to be fair, those are images, it's probably getting it from that and not the link itself.
INB4 suggestion to make the timestamps generated gif images...
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
INB4 suggestion to make the timestamps generated gif images...
And a dedicated CDN to distribute the images.
-
@ben_lubar a month? maybe we could make a poll
-
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
I like the current system; fake timestamps by default, hover to reveal the real timestamp.
I love hovering cursor on mobile.
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
I like the current system; fake timestamps by default, hover to reveal the real timestamp.
Unless you're on mobile, then no hover for you!
Though I wonder, how difficult is it to signal to the browser alt text for those who long-press a link? If the timestamp were presented that way maybe it wouldn't be so bad...
I think it’s just title tag, so pretty standard HTML.
-
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
I like the current system; fake timestamps by default, hover to reveal the real timestamp.
Unless you're on mobile, then no hover for you!
Though I wonder, how difficult is it to signal to the browser alt text for those who long-press a link? If the timestamp were presented that way maybe it wouldn't be so bad...
I think it’s just title tag, so pretty standard HTML.
Hmm.
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
I like the current system; fake timestamps by default, hover to reveal the real timestamp.
Unless you're on mobile, then no hover for you!
Though I wonder, how difficult is it to signal to the browser alt text for those who long-press a link? If the timestamp were presented that way maybe it wouldn't be so bad...
I think it’s just title tag, so pretty standard HTML.
Hmm.
Yes. In fact, if you hover over any text in my post, it should work too.
-
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
it should work too.
But it doesn't so square enix?
what?
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
I like the current system; fake timestamps by default, hover to reveal the real timestamp.
Unless you're on mobile, then no hover for you!
Though I wonder, how difficult is it to signal to the browser alt text for those who long-press a link? If the timestamp were presented that way maybe it wouldn't be so bad...
I think it’s just title tag, so pretty standard HTML.
Hmm.
-
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
without
No.
do you not see the text in brackets after it
that is what titles are on mobile
-
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
without
No.
do you not see the text in brackets after it
that is what titles are on mobileNo, this is what (Ben's?) CSS hack gets titles to be on mobile. Show me literally anywhere else where that happens.
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
without
No.
do you not see the text in brackets after it
that is what titles are on mobileNo, this is what (Ben's?) CSS hack gets titles to be on mobile. Show me literally anywhere else where that happens.
*in posts
-
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@pie_flavor said in Timestamp no work:
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
@kt_ said in Timestamp no work:
without
No.
do you not see the text in brackets after it
that is what titles are on mobileNo, this is what (Ben's?) CSS hack gets titles to be on mobile. Show me literally anywhere else where that happens.
*in posts
That's better. ;)
-
@ben_lubar said in Timestamp no work:
Admins can set it to go to normal date/time after a certain number of days. Any suggestions?
Configurable option in user settings.
-
@xaade said in Timestamp no work:
@ben_lubar said in Timestamp no work:
Admins can set it to go to normal date/time after a certain number of days. Any suggestions?
Configurable option in user settings.
Seems like the best solution with people having such different opinions.
Personally, I rarely care about the accuracy more than it says on the relative timestamps, and it's a lot quicker to read and comprehend than just a date. At least the dates aren't ambiguous 08/09/2017 or the server time though. On CS timestamps were useless to anyone not in the right time zone
-
@jaloopa said in Timestamp no work:
Configurable option in user settings.
Seems like the best solution with people having such different opinions.
And that's how we end up with unusable Linux config files with bazillions of options that no one ever checks. Apple gets a lot of flack (and some of it is justified IMO) for doing the opposite, but they have a point: most people won't bother with options (either because they don't want to do the work, or simply because they never find -- or search for! -- the option), so the default has to be somewhat sane, because that's what will be used more often than not.
(the only way I know of to make people really think about an option is to put a default that is so atrociously wrong that no one can bear it and everyone searches how to change it... but that's hardly user-friendly!)
Still, I guess having a single option "show relative timestamps" might be OK.
Personally, I rarely care about the accuracy more than it says on the relative timestamps, and it's a lot quicker to read and comprehend than just a date.
Same for me. I wouldn't say that I like these relative timestamps, but I find them OK-ish, and the real time isn't that hard to find (you don't have to view raw or other contrived operation, they are in the most likely place they could be). For me, fixing the mobile problem is the only thing that really needs to be improved.
(sure, there are edge effects such as the "2 years ago" / "about a year ago", but if you have a long thread with continuous posts every few hours since 2 years, you'd necessarily have this kind of step at one point)
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Timestamp no work:
No, this is what (Ben's?) CSS hack gets titles to be on mobile.
Mine. On Discourse. Happened around the same time as I did
this.
-
@xaade said in Timestamp no work:
@ben_lubar said in Timestamp no work:
Admins can set it to go to normal date/time after a certain number of days. Any suggestions?
Configurable option in user settings.
Would also solve the issue of some people wanting MM/DD/YYYY timestamps and other people wanting YY/MM/DD timestamps.
-
-
-
@luhmann said in Timestamp no work:
@hardwaregeek said in Timestamp no work:
go home
Only 5 minutes left!
Lucky bastard. I haven't even gone to work yet today.
-
@hardwaregeek
I would love to stay and chat but I'm buggering off right now ...
-
@luhmann said in Timestamp no work:
@hardwaregeek
I would love to stay and chat but I'm buggering off right now ...I really don't want to know that much about your personal life. TMI.
-
@hardwaregeek said in Timestamp no work:
@anotherusername said in Timestamp no work:
YY/MM/DD
No. Go ISO 8601 or go home!
I'm guessing you didn't view the raw.
-
@anotherusername said in Timestamp no work:
I'm guessing you didn't view the raw.
Ah, no, I didn't. I never view the raw unless there is some visible cue in the post to suggest that I should (e.g., text that is in too many <small> tags to read).
-
@hardwaregeek said in Timestamp no work:
@anotherusername said in Timestamp no work:
YY/MM/DD
No. Go ISO 8601 or go home!
I demand Stardate notation.
-