To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.geekOpen lugnet.off-topic.geek in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Geek / 2894
2893  |  2895
Subject: 
Re: HTML URL question
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.geek
Date: 
Wed, 21 Mar 2001 09:37:59 GMT
Viewed: 
339 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Jamie Obrien writes:
Hi, i'm not sure about efficiency in computing, but i use the relative one
most of the time, for the mere fact that if i move the files to a different
machine or server, i don't have to change all the absolute references to
relfect the new machine/server.

Jamie

In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Jim Hughes writes:
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="http://elementregistry/history.html">

or

b) a relative reference e.g. <a href="../../history.html">

Or doesnt it make any real difference?

Thanks

--Jim

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 page/site location cannot be seen with a lengthy A-HREF. Also true
with other browsers...

--Electro--



Message is in Reply To:
  (canceled)
 

5 Messages in This Thread:


Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR