Subject:
|
Re: My webpage is up!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.publish
|
Date:
|
Sun, 20 Feb 2000 00:40:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1008 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Todd Lehman wrote:
>
> > First, the URL is wrong -- you've got:
> >
> > http://www.fibblesnork.com/lego/backgrounds
> >
> > and the correct URL is:
> >
> > http://www.fibblesnork.com/lego/backgrounds/
> >
> > (That's a very tiny mistake...no biggie.)
>
> I've seen you comment on this before, in this and other contexts.
>
> Why, for the elucidation of the audience at home, is this a mistake,
> exactly? Both forms lead to the same place, right? Or is it possible
> that at some future point in how you organize things that they won't?
> (or at some future point in how HTML is defined to work...)
It's technically incorrect, at least according to apache. The real problem
is that when you click on the first link, apache returns a "document
moved permanently (301) response to the browser along with the second
url as the forward reference. The client then make another http request
for the second url. This is obviously inefficient, and also results
in duplicat entries in the log file that need to be filtered out (based
on their 301 result code) to avoid artificially inflated stats.
In reality it hardly makes a difference for anybody.
KL
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: My webpage is up!
|
| (...) I've seen you comment on this before, in this and other contexts. Why, for the elucidation of the audience at home, is this a mistake, exactly? Both forms lead to the same place, right? Or is it possible that at some future point in how you (...) (25 years ago, 20-Feb-00, to lugnet.publish)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
