 | | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) Well, if you link directly to things deep within a site, you're not really respecting the user experience the site designer had in mind. That may or may not be impolite. (In fact, I'd argue that on a well designed site, it probably isn't.) (...) (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
Matthew: (...) A web page is supposed to be able to stand alone (of cause with all its links). If it can't, the site designer has misunderstood his medium (IMNSHO). (...) Probably illegal, but since the author doesn't seem to pretend that the (...) (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) I think a web SITE is supposed to be able to stand alone... A page is just a part of it - it could be only one frame out of a complete frameset... (...) I think Matt was refering to the quote at the bottom, shamelessly stolen from (...) (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
Dan: (...) I disagree! (and I think we will have to leave it at that) (...) That is a part of the error in the FRAME construction. (...) Then I will consider to drop the "probably". (...) The question is when it is abuse... Todd has the images on (...) (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) how so? should I put in every page in every frameset a check to make sure I'm still within it? I'm not sure I understand what you mean here... (...) what about using up their bandwidth? (...) I'm not saying it's never ok - in a lot of cases, (...) (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
Dan: (...) The HTML construct with the FRAMESET and FRAME elements is a serious mistake that Netscape forced unto W3C even though it doesn't fit with the design of the web. (...) I don't feel the least bit bad about using peoples bandwidth, and I (...) (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) while true - at least then they get to generate revenue, or attract to the rest of the site. If you use pause DB pics in your ebay auction (for instance), you are abuseing the fact that the pics are up there. (...) people should read what you (...) (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
Dan: (...) If they make the pages with links to the rest of the site, then that shouldn't be the least bit difficult. And I can't see how a "cover page" can generate more revenue than a page inside the site. (...) If you use Pause DB images alone, (...) (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) Assuming they didn't ask your permission first, I'd say grabbing your quotes is kinda rude. Except for the existence of your uncopyright page, which pretty much allows anyone to do what they want. But still, professional sites should have (...) (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) Less shamelessly now, btw -- the page maintainer has made a more obvious credit to Q'R'U, and I'm okay with that if he is. (See: (URL)). (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) Yet for things like Quotes 'R' Us, it makes a lot of sense. Why reload the entire page when all you want is a new quote? (24 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek) !
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) Surely you don't mean this to be true in general, right? Else you are OK with spam, since, after all, it's just using up bandwidth, right? (...) But what if the publisher wants that particular resource to be presented in the fashion that the (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
Larry: (...) Not in general, but by directing readers to interesting material. I wouldn't want people to _waste_ bandwidth, but I find that when there is something good on the web, then as many people as possible (of those who are interested) should (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
