Am Freitag, 28. Februar 2020 02:11:20 UTC+1 schrieb Thomas Passin: I think the capabilities of the Nav tab will go a long way. >
True, there is also that. I always forget it, because it's so bad UX. BTW Using "created" instead of "timestamp" would be more self-documentating. >> > > That's up in the air for me. Should it represent the creation time or the > last-modified time? > Both have value, so add both. I don't want to add yet another piece of metadata if it's not needed. > It's always better to collect more than neccessary than to some day miss what's needed. Storage is cheap. Yet the Leo id does actually include a timestamp for the creation time. > It's not expliciet, nor portable. You must be aware of it when you decide to change the ID or software some day. And this is something which can be easily move out of sight. Ok, that's my habits as a devloper shining. Non-devs probably see it different. But general experience with those things is that they should be clear. I'd like to settle on one specific name for that timestamp, though, and > finalize it soon before I have too many nodes the other way. > Strictly spoken, the name alone is not much of a problem. One can always write a script for mass-changing this. that is the advantage of structured data. What it can't do is adding missing data. But of course I only speak from perspektive of a developer, so take it with a grain. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/1973197e-695f-4407-a14e-cc2305888424%40googlegroups.com.
