[thelist] [CODE] bloated image src names

[r937 at interlog.com]

> > Good for starters, anyway ...

thanks, hassan, yes, that's the spirit


duplicate names is actually a very good one

i tried to zip up a client site the other day that had duplicates in subfolders

winzip barfed

okay, there's probably an override option, but i couldn't find it

with no directories, i wouldn't even have had to look


another advantage is moving stuff around

your point about looking up the path is also quite valid, hassan

anyone here ever had a broken link because the file you wanted
was in a different folder than where you thought?

when it comes to moving stuff around,
a) you'll never have a broken link, because
b) there's no place to move stuff to, since
c) everything's at the root anyway, so
d) might as well go for a soda (nobody's hurt... oh, sorry)


michael, i liked your approach, a set of rules is a very good idea

> _all_ images go in the /images directory,
> the only exception being unique cases

heh, good one

"the only exceptions are the exceptions"


jeff, i think you are so far ahead of me in app development,
i should just shut up, but hey, i didn't get this far in life
just blindly accepting the way things are without question

> ... as long as that "in seconds" estimate doesn't account for
> the many, many seconds it'll take to request, download, and
> render the file listing

i don't want to get into a bandwidth discussion (50k file names
times 100 bytes divided by a cable connection is still only a few secs)
but i can tell you from experience that ws-ftp pro still wants
me to click on a folder to see its subfolders, and that's a
royal pain in the ass to do more than one level deep

much rather have a long list than have to keep going back to the
server in dribs and drabs

your point about accessibility and hacking has already been
conceded

> sure, i see the point you're trying to make that semantically
> "images_foo_bar.jpg" is the same as "images/foo/bar.jpg".
> however, i don't see the point that there are any advantages
> to the former.

keep looking, you will find

and keep an open mind

;o)


chris,

> those questions were posed to rudy
> since he's the one with the burden of proof

???

where does it say that folders are required and that i have
to prove that not using folders has an advantage?

as my mom used to say, if all your friends jump off a cliff,
does that mean you should too?

any issue like this has pros and cons, for both sides

folders have some advantages, sure, but not using them has
advantages too, and i just figured it's time somebody stood up
for the no folders strategy because it hasn't received the attention
that i think it deserves

my main point was that with a good naming convention, you
don't *need* folders in order to have good organization

for example, if you change images/foo/bar.jpg to images_foo_bar.jpg
the first thing i would do is ditch the "images" at the front, eh?

like, that's as dumb as naming your database tables "tblProduct"
and "tblOrder"

;o)


rudy