On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 7:29 PM, CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Accepting of the idea that the static Job Date is used to
represent the [one] Day of the running job, there is surely
a comparatively smaller value in having a static Job Time
to represent the [one] Second of the running job

Smaller yes, but the cutoff is arbitrary. Someone may want to (for
whatever reason) use hours as their "job duration buckets" in which
case "job date" is insufficient. They would need a job time (and not
care about the minutes or seconds, just as someone using calendar-day
job duration buckets doesn't care about the hours or minutes or
seconds).

I cannot stress enough that I really don't think any modifiable "job
duration bucket" is necessary (i.e. I would not have provided "job
date" if I were designing things), and in fact I think in many cases
having such a thing is actually an actively *bad* idea. This is
because I've seen what people can do when they see something that
looks like it might be the piece of information they want, but is
really not. (Programmer A sees "job date" and thinks "ah, the job
start date", but Programmer B has already modified this attribute so
that it no longer matches the real job start date, etc., etc., etc.)

John

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].