Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Sort by recency vs sort by year (descending) #47

Open
hhchen1105 opened this issue Nov 25, 2015 · 6 comments
Open

Sort by recency vs sort by year (descending) #47

hhchen1105 opened this issue Nov 25, 2015 · 6 comments

Comments

@hhchen1105
Copy link

What is the difference between "sort by recency" and "sort by year (descending)"?

a

@pychuang
Copy link
Contributor

"Sorted by Recency" will sort the documents by vtime which is version time. I guess it means the time that the document being added into/updated in CiteSeerX database.

@hhchen1105
Copy link
Author

Thanks for the clarification. It makes sense from a system admin's perspective. However, I guess the term "recency" may confuse users (at least it confuses me for a while). Maybe we should explicitly say sorted by "ingestion time"?

@fanchyna
Copy link
Contributor

I agree, or maybe we should get rid of it.
We should use terms commonly used by people.

Thanks
Jian

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:29 PM, hhchen1105 [email protected]
wrote:

Thanks for the clarification. It makes sense from a system admin's
perspective. However, I guess the term "recency" may confuse users (at
least it confuses me for a while). Maybe we should explicitly say sorted by
"ingestion time"?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#47 (comment).

@cleegiles
Copy link

Instead of "recency"

use the phrase

"ingestion recency"

On 11/24/15 10:32 PM, Jian Wu wrote:

I agree, or maybe we should get rid of it.
We should use terms commonly used by people.

Thanks
Jian

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:29 PM, hhchen1105 [email protected]
wrote:

Thanks for the clarification. It makes sense from a system admin's
perspective. However, I guess the term "recency" may confuse users (at
least it confuses me for a while). Maybe we should explicitly say sorted by
"ingestion time"?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#47 (comment).


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#47 (comment)

@madian9
Copy link

madian9 commented Nov 25, 2015

I think it might be confusing to users. Perhaps"Recently Added"?

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:45 AM, C Lee Giles [email protected]
wrote:

Instead of "recency"

use the phrase

"ingestion recency"

On 11/24/15 10:32 PM, Jian Wu wrote:

I agree, or maybe we should get rid of it.
We should use terms commonly used by people.

Thanks
Jian

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:29 PM, hhchen1105 [email protected]
wrote:

Thanks for the clarification. It makes sense from a system admin's
perspective. However, I guess the term "recency" may confuse users (at
least it confuses me for a while). Maybe we should explicitly say
sorted by
"ingestion time"?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
<#47 (comment)
.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#47 (comment)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#47 (comment).

@hntd187
Copy link

hntd187 commented Nov 25, 2015

How about just "Recently Added to CSX" I think with the other options it's prolly helpful to specify what it's been added to.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants