[thelist] pros/ cons of using relative links

[VanSchoick, Jonathan]

Actually, I don't see anything wrong with /images/ instead of ../images. To me, /images is more portable since you can nest the original file deeper without breaking the link (e.g. /images/foo.gif would stay the same but ../images/foo.gif would need to become ../../images/foo.gif).

If you configure a virtual host to be a document root that mirrors the 'real' site, then the links shouldn't be a problem. It looks as if you're trying to host multiple projects under your main root instead of giving each project its own root.

Also, the '/images/foo.gif' is a fully qualified path, since it begins at a the root of a tree. '../images/foo.gif' is a relative path. How you organize and write paths like this is somewhat of a religious war, there are pluses and minuses to both and people seem to adhere to what they link the best. As long as they're not using absolute references (www.example.com/images/foo.gif), you should be okay.

HTH,
Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: David Turner [mailto:david.turner at synergy.tv]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 7:21 AM
Subject: [thelist] pros/ cons of using relative links

<snip>
so i am about to insist that new projects all use relative links.

what is the concensus of the list about the merits of this? [i was going to
say the relative merits but... :-) ]

ps. all development is done using asp, javascript and MSSQL
pss. when i say relative links, i mean they should use ../images/david.gif
rather than /images/david.gif
</snip>


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This E-Mail is intended only 
for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute and delete the original message.  Please notify the sender by E-Mail at the address shown. Thank you for your compliance.