Udostępnij za pośrednictwem

Draft posts... what should they display for 'date posted'?

  • Artykuł

I've been using unpublished posts as a way to create planned blog posts for later... then, when I have a chance I go back and finish them up and mark them as 'Published'... but I just noticed that when I do that, the published date is the date on which I originally created the unpublished post. I can certainly understand why that is, but I'm curious as what everyone else expects?

I'd like the 'posted on' date to reflect the date it was first made accessible/visible to the public, so whenever it first posted if it is posted as visible, or whenever it is first made visible.... as it is now, I could create a draft post, then create 3 or 4 more posts (which I post as visible) and then, when I go back and mark the draft as ready to publish, it appears 3 or 4 posts down in my RSS feed (and on the site)...

So what do you think? Should posted on reflect the date the post was created, even if it was never published, or the date/time at which it first became visible to readers of the blog?

Comments

  • Anonymous
    June 07, 2004
    I talk a bit about this along with the possible use of published vs unpublished in a kind of always on top attack.

    http://weblogs.asp.net/justin_rogers/archive/2004/06/05/149336.aspx

  • Anonymous
    June 07, 2004
    After some moments of reflection I think I agree with you: the post's date should be updated to the "release" date when it is published.
  • Anonymous
    June 07, 2004
    I'd like both a "draft/published" attribute and, at least with .Text, the ability to tweak the dates as I want.
  • Anonymous
    June 08, 2004
    I definitely think it should be the published date. I like seeing all of the newest RSS entries at the top rather than having to search down the list.
  • Anonymous
    June 10, 2004
    ++ on the date reflecting the published date.

    I'd also be curious to know if the normal cutoff at 10 blog entries per feed will miss long-in-draft posts.