|
· Föderation EN Di 17.09.2024 19:04:47 @trwnh @silverpill @erincandescent @julian oh, yes, that's true, if you do "volatile paging" (last 20 pages). If you have reified pages (item goes in one page and stays there), once the pages are full, they don't change (except for `Remove` activities). Don't do volatile paging. If you use reified pages, an add to a reverse-chron collection will typically have changes to `first` and the Collection itself. |
|
Föderation EN Di 17.09.2024 19:05:59 @trwnh @silverpill @erincandescent @julian If you have bidirectional links (`first` and `last`) you can have stable collections with rev-chron or forward-chron. So, fair point. |
|
Föderation EN Di 17.09.2024 19:11:22 @evan @silverpill @erincandescent @julian Yeah, my point is that it seems almost entirely conventional whether to have "reverse" mean first.next.next... or last.prev.prev... -- and I favor the latter approach because it makes more sense imo, no double-inversion ("reverse-reverse chron", anyone?) |
|
Föderation EN Di 17.09.2024 19:16:14 @trwnh @silverpill @erincandescent @julian Except for most interfaces, your first page is the current stuff, and you go back in time to find earlier stuff. |
|
Föderation EN Di 17.09.2024 19:36:36 @evan @silverpill @erincandescent @julian This is what I meant by "conventional". On a forum thread, you generally read forward. On social media like Twitter, there is a heavy bias toward going reverse. And some interfaces even let you choose ascending or descending order. |
