Re^3: Suggestion for a new tag: <update>

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.

Comment on Re^3: Suggestion for a new tag: <update>

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
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]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

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]