[thelist] fqdn v. absolute or relative path

Chris W. Parker cparker at swatgear.com
Thu Dec 26 17:35:01 CST 2002


> -----Original Message-----
> From: rudy [mailto:r937 at interlog.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 3:29 PM
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] fqdn v. absolute or relative path
>
>
> conventional terminology, to the best of my knowledge, is:
>
> absolute:
> http://servername/directories/if/necessary/page.htm
>
> root relative:
> /directories/if/necessary/page.htm
>
> relative:
> ../if/necessary/page.htm

ah yes. thank you for clearing that up.

> of these, the first is by far the wrong way to code links to
> pages within
> the same site

that's good to know.

> the second is better than the third, but in the example you
> gave, where an
> entire site is "moving up" two levels, the second will
> require search &
> replace while the third shouldn't

yeah, that's what i thought. (but for some reason i continued to write
the "absolute" urls.)

> as for effect on the logs, i'm pretty sure there is none at
> all, as the logs
> record the urls requested by the browser, which are always stated in
> absolute terms

ok.


thanks for clearing all that up rudy.


chris.



More information about the thelist mailing list