3 ms·

If you mean an HTTP header, no, that doesn't work, since you never know whether the thing you get there is an accident or an actually meaningful value. Putting

by marijn 12y ago

If you mean an HTTP header, no, that doesn't work, since you never know whether the thing you get there is an accident or an actually meaningful value. Putting it somewhere where it doesn't stand out is acceptable. What annoys me is if I want to know when something was written (for example because the interpretation of a reference it makes would be different before and after some historical event), and there is no way to find out.

patio11 12y ago
<meta name="date" content="May 19th, 2014" />
- marijn 12y ago
  I have no idea where browsers display that, and if you require obscure browser feature or source reading for people to find out the date, you are putting undue obstacles in their way.
- gojomo 12y ago
  That hides it from everyone but HTML pros, and even as an HTML pro myself, I'd typically not think to check the META if they've already designed the date entirely out of the visible text. (I'd instead check for 1st appearance in the Wayback Machine.) I suspect the best hybrid strategy, for those who feel dates complete a duty to the reader, is to put the date in small, low-contrast text near the bottom. Perhaps also, when minor edits occur, update one or more similarly-subtle 'updated' dates. That emphasizes the material is not obsolete/stale, but live reference material still maintained.
amirmc 12y ago
I concur. It really irritates me that some writers feel their content must somehow be timeless and yet a year later it's superseded because something in the world changed. When I'm trying to research something completely new to me I cannot build up any kind of meaningful chronology using such posts. I do agree that the date doesn't need to be right alongside the byline but an indication of date somewhere on the page is important. Edit: As for people who devalue something purely because of the date, are these readers you really care about? I suspect there are annoying readers just as there are annoying customers.
tnorthcutt 12y ago
He does not mean an HTTP header, just somewhere not prominent.

by marijn 12y ago

patio11 12y ago

marijn 12y ago
I have no idea where browsers display that, and if you require obscure browser feature or source reading for people to find out the date, you are putting undue obstacles in their way.
gojomo 12y ago
That hides it from everyone but HTML pros, and even as an HTML pro myself, I'd typically not think to check the META if they've already designed the date entirely out of the visible text. (I'd instead check for 1st appearance in the Wayback Machine.) I suspect the best hybrid strategy, for those who feel dates complete a duty to the reader, is to put the date in small, low-contrast text near the bottom. Perhaps also, when minor edits occur, update one or more similarly-subtle 'updated' dates. That emphasizes the material is not obsolete/stale, but live reference material still maintained.

amirmc 12y ago

I concur. It really irritates me that some writers feel their content must somehow be timeless and yet a year later it's superseded because something in the world changed. When I'm trying to research something completely new to me I cannot build up any kind of meaningful chronology using such posts. I do agree that the date doesn't need to be right alongside the byline but an indication of date somewhere on the page is important. Edit: As for people who devalue something purely because of the date, are these readers you really care about? I suspect there are annoying readers just as there are annoying customers.

tnorthcutt 12y ago

He does not mean an HTTP header, just somewhere not prominent.