 | | HTML URL question —Jim Hughes
|
| | | Heres a question; I am working of some web site scripting and wonder if any of you know which is more effecient to call; a) an absolute reference, e.g <a href="(URL) or b) a relative reference e.g. <a href="../../history.html"> Or doesnt it make any (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | |
| | | | | (canceled) —Jamie Obrien
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: HTML URL question —David Martineau
|
| | | | | | (...) I like it when website designers use relative URLs. On WebTV, when a link is highlighted, you press crtl + cmd to see the target address; however, you're limited to the number of characters displayed in the little window, so the final (...) (24 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: HTML URL question —John D. Forinash
|
| | | | (...) As efficiency goes, no, it doesn't really make a whole lot of difference-- that all happens on the browser end and in today's world of piles o' graphics and javascript and ActiveX controls and who knows what else, a couple of strncmp()s and a (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: HTML URL question —Jim Hughes
|
| | | | (...) Great, that was the answer I was hoping for. It will be alot easier for me to script from an absolute reference than it will for me to constantly figure out the relative position of a given page. --Jim (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
