_____/ On Mon 19 Dec 2005 06:09:45 GMT, [Aaron Bird] wrote : \_____
> http://www.w3.org/Addressing/URL/uri-spec.txt
>
> Have a look at Section 8:
>
> <snippet>
>
> Note: Trailing slashes
>
> If a path of the context locator ends in slash, partial URIs are
> treated differently to the URI with the same path but without a
> trailing slash. The trailing slash indicates a void segment of the
> path.
>
> </snippet>
>
> The point made by Berners-Lee is that syntax pertaining to structure
need be
> avoided. For example, ".." might have a special meaning. What about
spaces
> ("%20") for example? They lead to a command-line ambiguity (spaces have
a
> special meaning, also in the context of namespace). They were embraced
by
> Windows in particular. I'm in favour of no trailing slash, but either
> way, they
> don't lead to PageRank leakage, unlike, for instance, the www umbilical
cord.
> It's not crucial and permanent link will not be broken either way.
>
> Roy
On 12/18/05, Sean Hayford O'Leary <hayfordoleary@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm very anti-"www." too (in spite of my previous www. linkage in this
thread, all of the sites I manage are set to remove www. from their
addresses. Once again, just would have been nice to be able to turn it
off, certainly not going to prevent me from using WordPress.
What does strike me with a great deal more anger at WP is the
difficulty in customising the upload path. Could someone please tell
me how I can do this now? (Hate to drag up old arguments, but I would
point out that people like consistency, and they hardly want to go
back and change all of their old image URIs. I'm pro-YYYY/MM, though.
Still think it was dorky to remove option from admin ui [especially
when we have a colour customiser]).
Happy to argue the point, but, again, much more urgently, I want to
know how to customise it (I've been having to make thumbnails in
Photoshop then FTP). Oh, speaking of which, can the size of default
thumbnail be changed?
Yes he is very anti-"www." he hates the "www" do not put it in your links.
If you are referring to that W3C URL, I guess you are right. Educate
search engines or browsers to help us get rid of it. I recently contacted
Netcraft because, unlike Alexa for example, they treat www.example.org
differently from example.org. Their replies (two sent for the same query)
argued in defence of that choice, saying the addresses are unique.
Having said that, the 'www.' part is frequently a necessity. One site of
mine, which is hosted on BSD, requires the 'www.'. Many sites which are
driven by PHP (or equivalent server-side PL) run a function[1] every time
a page is requested just to ensure removal (or inclusion) of the 'www.',
all for the sake of consistency. Making the transition, as I attempted to
do several times in the past caused problems. Saved passwords and automat-
ed re-directions lead to a mess. Someone I know confirmed the undesirable
effect on Wikis and password-protected pages, but there are workarounds.
Roy
[1] Example:
$request = $_SERVER['REQUEST_URI'];
$server = $_SERVER['HTTP_HOST'];
$prefix = strtolower(substr($server,0,4));
if ($prefix != "www.") {
# combine page rank
header("HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently");
header("Location: http://www.$server$request";;);
exit;
}
|
|
