The big difference is that I got pretty ABSOLUTE time as a fallback, while https://github.com/kraih/mojo/compare/time_in_words is used to create pretty RELATIVE time.
On Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:46:03 PM UTC+2, Stefan Adams wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Jan Henning Thorsen < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Stefan: That is indeed a Mojolicious template. What I meant is that I >> want to provide a pretty absolute time (not like the ironman webpage) and >> then I replace that on the client side with whatever "data-timestamp" >> holds. time() = something computers (javascript) can understand and >> pretty_absolute_time() is something humans can read. >> >> Another thing is that pretty_absolute_time() makes also more sense if you >> plan to print the webpage. Therefor I wouldn't replace the <span> tag, but >> rather hide it by default on "media screen" and show it on "media print". >> > > Thanks for the response, Jan. I think this makes sense, however, as I > understand it you're still calling a Perl function to output pretty time / > cutesy dates -- the very function that Sri was proposing and that you were > suggesting isn't useful because you like to render it on the client > (javascript). But it sounds like you are still rendering cutesy dates on > the server. I'm not suggesting that this is sufficient cause to introduce > cutesy dates into Mojo core by any means, just trying to keep up with you > in the conversation and understand your response and rationale. Sorry for > my inability to understand better. :D > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mojolicious" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mojolicious. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
