[11:56]  * MacSlow -> lunch
[15:36] <tedg> mpt: Can we talk about time a little bit? :)
[15:36] <tedg> mpt: Mark had mentioned having the time in the messaging indicator be time elapsed.
[15:36] <tedg> mpt: I was just going to do minutes if it's minutes and hours if it's hours.  Do you think it needs to be more sophisticated?
[15:40] <mpt> tedg, not sure, but my first thought was to show relative time for <60 minutes ago and absolute time for greater
[15:41] <tedg> mpt: That seems like a confusing change.  I think having both would confuse me.
[15:42] <tedg> For sure you couldn't look at it quickly.
[15:43] <mpt> tedg, Nautilus has a similar switch, using relative dates for things modified today or yesterday, absolute dates for anything older.
[15:43] <mpt> and Thunderbird omits the day for messages received today.
[15:46] <tedg> mpt: The mail case isn't change the information provided, it's just changing the amount of detail.  We'd be changing from relative to absolute.
[15:46] <mpt> sure
[15:46] <tedg> mpt: And in the Nautilus case they have more space to provide that distinction.  They can do "4 minutes ago" where we'd be doing "3 m".
[15:47] <mpt> true
[15:48] <mpt> so for space reasons, I think it would make more sense just to stick with absolute times
[15:48] <tedg> For locale reasons I'd prefer to stick with relative times ;)
[15:49] <tedg> It solves the problem of "I prefer X type of time" which is tricky, and goes beyond locale.
[15:58] <tcole> there's also the issue that people think more in terms of relative time
[16:02] <tedg> tcole: Absolutely! ;)