Datestamps... seriously?



  • Can someone please tell me what the value is in obscuring the actual date/time a post was posted?

    When people are expected to do their own support and research, obliterating one of the most important ways to do this research and not waste the person's time is extremely user-unfriendly.

    When I see a post that simply says "3 years ago", it makes it IMPOSSIBLE for me to easily and quickly ascertain if I've seen this post before, if it came before or after an issue was fixed/addressed/discussed etc etc.. is this not obvious to people?


  • Vivaldi Team

    If you hover the datestamp you get the exact date and time it was posted:
    Fri Nov 04 2016 17:30:52 GMT+0000 (GMT)



  • @isak said in Datestamps... seriously?:

    If you hover the datestamp you get the exact date and time it was posted:
    Fri Nov 04 2016 17:30:52 GMT+0000 (GMT)

    Ooh, good tip. Did that exist on the old forum system too?

    Thanks.



  • @isak Please, just give us the ability to set in our settings whether we want the relative or absolute dates. I'm always choosing the latter, when I have the choice. Take a look at EA (screenshot taken from answers.ea.com) - it's one of the few things that they did really good... 😁

    0_1478283107504_Przechwytywanie.JPG

    It's not that important to me, so it can wait. Just please consider this as a future feature, as hovering over the datestamp is inconvenient and also impossible on devices like a tablet or a phone. Thank you for your hard work! 😎



  • I was just playing around and I'm quite happy with the results. Maybe you will like it too. – If you are using the extension Stylish, you can create a new style for URLs starting with "https://forum.vivaldi.net/" and the code:

    .timeago:after {content: " " attr(title);}
    

    or a bit more complicated one, like:

    a.permalink {text-decoration: none !important;}
    a.permalink span.timeago {font-weight: normal; color: #777;}
    .timeago:after {content: " " attr(title); color: #23bcb1; font-weight: bold;}
    

    This will cause the date posted appear as, e.g.: 3 hours ago Fri Nov 04 2016 18:39:23 GMT+0100 (Central Europe Standard Time)



  • I have tweaked @Saskatchewan's idea a little bit. πŸ˜‰ If you want to play around with Stylish (personally I prefer the "User CSS" extension, but both should work just fine) here you have some code that will make it look like this:

    0_1478303252610_Przechwytywanie.JPG

    Use the code below:

    .timeago {
    	font-size: 0 !important; 
    }
    
    .timeago:after {
    	content: attr(title);
    	display: inline-block;
    	width: 155px;
    	height: 13px;
    	overflow: hidden;
    	font-size: 13px;
    	line-height: 16px;
    	white-space: nowrap;
    	text-overflow: "";
    }
    

    It's imperfect and sometimes the last letters (those representing seconds in the timestamp) might get truncated, but you can change the "width" attribute, by giving it for example 156px or 157px, though this may cause the following letters of the timestamp to appear, making it look ugly. 😁 That width might be even completely wrong if you use another system or font settings, so you just have to try this out and find out for yourself.

    After all, that's just a workaround. The server-side solution that I was talking about before would be much better. πŸ˜‰



  • @isak

    @isak said in Datestamps... seriously?:

    If you hover the datestamp you get the exact date and time it was posted:
    Fri Nov 04 2016 17:30:52 GMT+0000 (GMT)

    It shouldn't need hovering. How do you hover using a keyboard?

    Also, when displayed, the date should be easy to read. Option one: give us options, as asked above; Option too, do not use a US-centric format, there are users from around the globe, with other languages, so having a bunch of short semi-cryptic words is not that user friendly. Why not go for ISO-like e.g. 2016-11-04 17:30:52 UTC+0000. We can do the math. Vivaldi is supposed to be for power users, right? Even more so the foruns, no?



  • I agree, I severely dislike this trend toward "days/months/years ago", and would rather just have plain datestamps.



  • @rkzn said in Datestamps... seriously?:

    We can do the math. Vivaldi is supposed to be for power users, right? Even more so the foruns, no?

    No. Vivaldi is not only for power-users, and the forums even less so. No one should need to do maths to work out a post time, but only power-users care about such things, and they are capable of hovering a date to see the details.. Seven days ago, or whatever is fine for most users.

    A forum needs to be designed to suit the needs of the vast majority of ordinary Internet users, not only for those of us who spend the whole day online.



  • @Isildur said in Datestamps... seriously?:

    I agree, I severely like this trend toward "days/months/years ago", and would rather just have plain datestamps.

    Ack, that was supposed to say dislike. How does one edit posts now???



  • How does one edit posts now???

    Click these three vertical dots below your post – there you have the option to edit it.



  • @Isildur It's here:
    editing options

    I know, it's not too intuitive and it has been requested at least several times to replace this icon with something else. πŸ˜‰

    Image Credits



  • @Saskatchewan @pafflick

    Thanks. At the zoom I was at (80%) I mistook it for an exclamation point, so I overlooked it, assuming it was itself a "flag post for moderation" button. =P

    By the way, I guess these @ tags when hitting reply only have an effect if the pinged person has manually unwatched the thread, since otherwise the person would get a ping about the thread update anyway? Or is there any other effect other than sending an "Unread" notification?



  • @Pesala said in Datestamps... seriously?:

    not only for those of us who spend the whole day online.

    I definitely do not spend all day online (I do not even have internet access at work...)



  • The "fuzzy time" style, e.g. "3 years ago", seems to be generally for style reasons, not usability. I mean it rarely helps in any way to know that a message has been posted "4 months ago" (what does it even mean?), but it can help a lot to be able to compare dates.

    Another reason I can think of to implement fuzzy time is for programmers to show off their leet talents, but that's a different story.



  • Another vote for timestamps.



  • Strange, it looks like it's been changed in some categories, and now I'm seeing absolute dates in older posts there. It looks like it's been changed arbitrarily, but I ain't going to complain about it... 😜



  • This post is deleted!


  • Taking a second, and third, and fourth, look at it...

    I think what I dislike is not really having a time difference instead of an absolute date.

    Differences are fine, I often find myself thinking, "well, I haven't been here for how long?"

    I think the problem may be granularity. Having a whole bunch of "2 hours ago", or "15 days ago" somehow is strange. Maybe is because it breaks the feeling of time flow, maybe it is me not used to it...

    Sure we do not (always) need to have everything from four digits year down to the (mili)second. Maybe we could have a little more, though?

    Use the curent level, plus the following one? "9 days ago", would become "9 days 5 hours ago" or "9 days 1 hours ago"; "2 hours ago" would be "2 hours 35 minutes ago" and so on.

    Maybe... just thinking out loud :-)


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.