21 May 2003 | Joshua Kaufman said...

Since I started using an RSS reader, the publish date has become virtually irrelevant because my reader tells me when something is new. I only care about the date when I'm researching something on Google. Knowing when an entry was posted is useful can be useful in that regard.

21 May 2003 | Stefan Seiz said...

Well, i couldn't care less since i am reading the blogs using NetNewsWire Pro (far better than sliced bread) which comes with a Date Column similar to what you find in Email Clients. Should i be interrested in the posting date, that column is all i need ;-)

21 May 2003 | Mike said...

I suppose it really depends on the content. If the site is meant to be a journal, or something where the author is posting content that will make reference to "today", then a date is important and should be prominent.

If the site is meant as commentary, news, opinion, etc, then a date is useful for context, but not as important.

21 May 2003 | Ben Langhinrichs said...

It is important when searching and coming across a post, but less so when reading the blog regularly.

21 May 2003 | Steven Garrity said...

If you post several times a day, then the Scripting.com format works quite well. We've chosen not to group by days since we seldom have more than one post per day.

I do find that Scripting.com occasionally updates the current day's posts without putting the update at the top - I miss posts and updates this way.

I do like how Scripting.com has little anchor links (the blue arrows) all over the place - nice for interlinking. On the other hand, a site like SvN works well for linking and search indexing since each post having it's own page

I've been reading zeldman's site for years and I've never really noticed the data-stamp format - which means it obviously works pretty well.

22 May 2003 | rjs said...

Seeing dates on posts allows me to estimate how regularly I can expect future updates. I think this is how they are most useful, and that the topic is more important otherwise. This site is a good compromise because the headline is featured but the date is quietly there right with it for this purpose.

Dates are of course more important for certain subject matters. For example, if I read a blog that reports on a certain band, I may be interested in whether a post was made before or after an album release -- a date I know. That way I don't have to search for the "album is released" post to put the current post in context.

22 May 2003 | Scorched said...

I have a horrible time coming up with titles for blog entries. Often, I substitute the current date for something that would be less than meaningful.

22 May 2003 | Nico said...

I deliberately removed date stamps from my posts, which will be unpopular in some circles. My reasons revolved around the need for me to be able to post during work hours without work knowing I had.

22 May 2003 | Mixm said...

A clear date indicator gives the site a "newsfeed" feel. The clearest indicator is perhaps the position of the date, but of course bold or different-colored type can be used as well. If you want a more a "literary" feel, maybe the heading should be quite large compared to the date, and the position of the date can be subordinate.

22 May 2003 | Chester said...

Personally, I prefer seeing the date up front. No real technical reason for it, I just like it that way.

22 May 2003 | hurley#1 said...

Dates: Yes, I find them useful when scanning blogs.

Time of posting: Overkill in most cases, except when you know that people are checking your site several times a day and you want to be sure they realize that you've posted new content.

22 May 2003 | pb said...

Dates are of major importance since they are the singular defining factor of blogs. I tend to like the former approach of grouping entries for a given day. Since no blog that I know of has a true 24 hours continuous cycle, this still makes the most sense. I don't think there's any reason blogs should plan for future correctness since the genre can evolve so quickly. I find the Scripting News approach pretty lousy actually in that new posts for the day could show up anywhere and earlier posts get randomly edited. I find that I miss a lot of stuff and re-read a lot of stuff which totally defeats the purpose.

22 May 2003 | Nick said...

For me I got rid of the "big" datestamps for posts (I use a small datestamp now), because it wasn't important to the content. On so many sites, the first thing you see are "dates posted," when in fact what (typically) you want to see is content. Dates - though useful to some degree - aren't really why I'm reading a weblog.

27 May 2003 | Will said...

I'm from the Zeldman school for the purpose that I want my archives to be as useful as possible. If someone has taken the trouble to go back through a weblog's archives, the date may play a crucial factor in the quality of the information.

For instance, if you are searching a weblog and find a great snippet of CSS code, it would be very important to know whether it was from 2001 or 2003 before you consider using it yourself. The older information is the more likely it is to be replaced by more current knowledge.

On the flip side, the age of some posts may make them more valuable to the reader. If you're looking for raw unedited personall accounts of September 11, knowing the date and time of a post up front indicates whether it's worth continued reading.

05 Jan 2004 | FREE HUSTLER said...

Strapon Tales

Foot Orgies

Pantyola

Pantyhose Line

Nylon Feet Line

TryPantyhose

PantyhoseCoeds

Pantyhose Discounts

Wired Shemales

ePantyhose Land

Bi Trios

TransPantyhose

Pantyhose One

Pantyhose Face

12 Jan 2004 | casino said...

Excellent site I have bookmarked your site and I will come back soon!