[theme-reviewers] Pages: date/time stamp should not be displayed?!

[Edward Caissie]

Here is the original entry:
http://codex.wordpress.org/index.php?title=Theme_Unit_Test&oldid=91273#Page_With_Comments
Here is the current entry:
http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Unit_Test#Page_With_Comments

This is dealing with "Pages With Comments" specifically(?!), does this mean
theme authors are now required to not show timestamps in the comments, too?
I honestly do not see the difference between a page with or without
comments and the relevance of not having a timestamp displayed. I see
displaying a timestamp on a page as a service to the reader, one which the
author of the page content should be taking into consideration when they
write the original content and/or any subsequent edits as well.

Edward Caissie
aka Cais.


On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> I think, with respect to Static Pages, "static" also refers to "not
> time-dependent". Time is irrelevant to the Static Page and its content.
>
> Consider a static-content HTML site converted to WordPress - such as what
> people refer to when using that heinous, cringe-worthy phrase, "using
> WordPress as a CMS" - that static content exists outside of any sort of
> time reference. Publish date is irrelevant for Static Page content.
>
>
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> No timestamp means no fixed position means not static ...
>>
>> Edward Caissie
>> aka Cais.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Edward Caissie <
>> edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A published timestamp fixes the page to a point in time, thus making it
>>> truly static.
>>>
>>> Edward Caissie
>>> aka Cais.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let's look at this another way: what would be the point/benefit of
>>>> displaying the *publish* date/time on a Static Page?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Edward Caissie <
>>>> edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My bad for not "noticing" it before now ... but that does not change
>>>>> the point that it should not be in the guidelines; or the point that there
>>>>> are most likely quite a few themes that should not be in the repository
>>>>> based solely on that guideline as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> The point of something being static requires it to be fixed to a
>>>>> certain place or time thus having a timestamp is more likely to indicate
>>>>> the page to be static than to not have a timestamp. Having a guideline that
>>>>> dictates no fixed location, as in time, seems more counter-intuitive than
>>>>> useful.
>>>>>
>>>>> Edward Caissie
>>>>> aka Cais.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Amy Hendrix <sabreuse at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> (this is becoming a bad habit!) My bad -- that wasn't the original
>>>>>> version, just the oldest revision on the first page of history (D'OH!)
>>>>>> but my point is that the no timestamps guideline has been around for
>>>>>> several years now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Amy Hendrix <sabreuse at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > Sorry to follow up to my own email, but the first version of the
>>>>>> Unit
>>>>>> > Test codex page at
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> http://codex.wordpress.org/index.php?title=Theme_Unit_Test&oldid=91985
>>>>>> > has "Make sure datestamps or timestamps are not visible." in 2010 --
>>>>>> > as authored by Cais ;)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Amy Hendrix <sabreuse at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> The guideline that Posts should display timestamps but Pages should
>>>>>> >> not has been around for as long as I've been using the Theme Unit
>>>>>> Test
>>>>>> >> -- I completely agree that stale information on posts is always an
>>>>>> >> issue, but IME the norm for just about all the users I deal with is
>>>>>> >> that static pages should be seen as static, not time-dependent.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >>> I did not have time to check latest version yet, however I do
>>>>>> agree
>>>>>> >>> that timestamp should be displayed and not dictated if that is
>>>>>> the case.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Edward Caissie <
>>>>>> edward.caissie at gmail.com>
>>>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> I was just reviewing the latest Theme Unit Test data (mostly
>>>>>> because I
>>>>>> >>>> cannot seem to get the entire data set to import into my local
>>>>>> test
>>>>>> >>>> environment) and noticed "date/time stamp should not be
>>>>>> displayed" ...
>>>>>> >>>> perhaps I missed some extensive discussion but where did this
>>>>>> guideline come
>>>>>> >>>> from?
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> This is the single most common complaint about information found
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> >>>> WordPress installations that I hear, the reader generally has no
>>>>>> idea if the
>>>>>> >>>> information is current or stale ... and more often than not
>>>>>> those search
>>>>>> >>>> results that appear to rank highest tend also to be the ones
>>>>>> that are
>>>>>> >>>> outdated.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> I can see the category/tag meta data not being displayed (mostly
>>>>>> due to it
>>>>>> >>>> not being available in a default installation) but to not show
>>>>>> the timestamp
>>>>>> >>>> by reason of it being a guideline, that simply does not make
>>>>>> sense.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> By design? Yes. By theme author prerogative? Yes. Dictated by
>>>>>> the WPTRT?
>>>>>> >>>> NO.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Edward Caissie
>>>>>> >>>> aka Cais.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> >>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>> >>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>> >>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> >>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>> >>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>> >>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20130516/716317aa/attachment.html>