2 added 323 characters in body
source | link

As far as I can tell, there's no reason to be concerned about a field like completedOn. Can you say more specifically about what concerns you? It would help us to understand your concerns if you could provide an example of an implementation that you think is more correct.

There are some downsides to determining the time stamp on the client in my view, mostly around clock synchronization, timezones, and multiple clients having different ideas of the value of the time stamp.

Edit: One thing to consider is where the actual knowledge that the task was completed takes place. If the task is executed and complete on the client, then the client can and should be responsible for setting the time. If the task executes and completes on the server, then the completedOn field should be set there.

As far as I can tell, there's no reason to be concerned about a field like completedOn. Can you say more specifically about what concerns you? It would help us to understand your concerns if you could provide an example of an implementation that you think is more correct.

There are some downsides to determining the time stamp on the client in my view, mostly around clock synchronization, timezones, and multiple clients having different ideas of the value of the time stamp.

As far as I can tell, there's no reason to be concerned about a field like completedOn. Can you say more specifically about what concerns you? It would help us to understand your concerns if you could provide an example of an implementation that you think is more correct.

There are some downsides to determining the time stamp on the client in my view, mostly around clock synchronization, timezones, and multiple clients having different ideas of the value of the time stamp.

Edit: One thing to consider is where the actual knowledge that the task was completed takes place. If the task is executed and complete on the client, then the client can and should be responsible for setting the time. If the task executes and completes on the server, then the completedOn field should be set there.

1
source | link

As far as I can tell, there's no reason to be concerned about a field like completedOn. Can you say more specifically about what concerns you? It would help us to understand your concerns if you could provide an example of an implementation that you think is more correct.

There are some downsides to determining the time stamp on the client in my view, mostly around clock synchronization, timezones, and multiple clients having different ideas of the value of the time stamp.