[Wikipedia-l] order of lists of works & prizes

[Daniel Mayer]

On Saturday 28 September 2002 05:33 am,  tarquin wrote:
> This has been hanging around for some time, with most people in favour,
> and only 1 1/2 objections.
>
> In answer to Toby, I think we should choose a standard because
> consistency of presentation is important in a body of work such as an
> enclyclopedia. (The information itself is more important, of course.)
> If I found in a paper encyclopedia that the list of Nobel Laureates went
> one way, but Pulitzer Prizes went the other, I would be pretty unimpressed.

Perhaps LDC is so used to logs (where it is logical to have new items at top) 
that this is clouding the issue at hand. 

My vote is to have list chronological with the earliest item listed first. If 
the list gets too long thus forcing readers to page through old items to get 
to new ones, then it is time to break up the list into / pages.

Of course, anything with the explicit word "log" in the title should list new 
items at the top. This should make it clear.
 
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)