> date that it was last modified. So, users get entries that appear to
> be "old" even when they are "new." This confuses them. The issue here
> has *nothing* to do with data format -- it is a question of semantics,
My experience shows exactly the opposite; people report "new" when
actually a post is old. But in any case, I fail to see how adding
another field will stop people from putting the wrong dates in those
fields -- the semantics of "pubDate" are remarkably clear, and people
still screw it up. I would bet that in 99% of cases, people screw it up
because they don't know better, NOT because "pubDate is the only field
available and I really, really, want to store the last-update date in
the field".
Solving user ignorance by adding more features is not very smart.
