- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:48:29 -0800
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: Arun Ranganathan <aranganathan@mozilla.com>, Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>, Jian Li <jianli@chromium.org>
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 3:05 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:33:04 +0100, Arun Ranganathan > <aranganathan@mozilla.com> wrote: >> >> I agree that a readonly Date object returned for lastModified is one way >> to go, but considered it overkill for the feature. If you think a Date >> object provides greater utility to simply get at the lastModified data, I'm >> entirely amenable to putting that in the editor's draft. > > It depends on what the use cases are I suppose. But if the last modified > date is going to be displayed somehow having a Date object seems more > flexible. Plus if you're going to do any actual work with it - there's no sense parsing a date string just so you check if the file was modified more than a week ago, when you could do it directly with a Date. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 12 November 2010 16:49:22 UTC