Re^2: Suggestion for a new tag: <update>

While your proposal would give authors a way to mark major updates, I don't think they would solve the communication problem, for two reasons:

The user may not want to use special tags: some people have enough trouble just mastering paragraph and code tags. The net result is that many significant updates, especially by beginners, will not get marked.
I don't generally go back and read threads until a new node is posted on the thread, so I may never be on the thread to see the specially highlighted update.

What would help me would be a node equivalent to what we have now for major and minor updates to user pages:

an easy way for the author to self-nominate their change as a 'significant change', for example, by having an update and major update buttons (instead of the one button that now exists).
an option to see major updates flagged on either (or both) "Newest nodes" or "Recent Threads".

Best, beth

Comment on Re^2: Suggestion for a new tag: <update>

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Suggestion for a new tag: <update> by JavaFan (Canon) on Mar 02, 2009 at 21:59 UTC
I don't generally go back and read threads until a new node is posted on the thread Neither do I. That's why I never bother to put the word 'update' in my node, or make my node harder to read by inserting strike throughs. If I update my node it's either to fix spelling, grammar or markup mistakes, or to add or clarify a missing or unclear issue - but the latter I only do immediately after posting. In all other cases, I just followup to myself. It's easier for me, and people following the thread see an update was made. And the original is still there.	[reply]
Re^4: Suggestion for a new tag: <update> (updates--) by tye (Sage) on Mar 03, 2009 at 06:00 UTC
Yeah, that is the best practice for exactly those reasons. Certainly, there are cases where updates are just fine (essentially, where the update is helpful to people seeing the node for the first time but won't be missed by those who have already read the node). As for augmenting Newest nodes with Newestly minorly updated nodes and Newestly majorly updated nodes and User settings for what constitutes 'major' vs 'minor', no, as you can probably tell from my ficticious title choices, I don't see that as a great direction to go. (And the "this is a major update" checkbox has been a good example of a site feature that doesn't work very well in practice.) So I don't see much value in complex features for assigning timestamps to updates, etc. The best way to put a timestamp on a clarification is to put that clarification in a new node. - tye	[reply]