Just out of curiosity, I verified that boost.org qualifies as a "class A" domain name for http://no-www.org/index.php. I wonder: is it intentional that we always use "www" in our url references? -- [ Gennaro Prota, C++ developer for hire ] [ resume: available on request ]
is it intentional that we always use "www" in our url references?
Why wouldn't we ? at the moment the "acknowledged" convention uses www. Quoting from your site : No-www.org strives to make the Internet and communications about it as fruitful as possible. To that end, we make the modest proposal that website makers configure their main sites to be accessible by *domain.com* as well as *www.domain.com*. Looks like we already fit their philosophy... enlighten me if I missed something. Philippe
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 19:27:42 +0200, "Philippe Vaucher" <philippe.vaucher@gmail.com> wrote:
Quoting from your site :
Oh, it's absolutely not my site :)
[...] Looks like we already fit their philosophy... enlighten me if I missed something.
Well, they make a point that the use of the www subdomain is redundant and very often meaningless (see the last box of the page). They are not W3C and I'm in no way taking them as an authority but I happen to agree and was wondering why we never use www in references, for instance in the typical "See http://www.boost.org/library-name for documentation" (BTW, it would be preferable to add a trailing slash, but that's a different issue) -- [ Gennaro Prota, C++ developer for hire ] [ resume: available on request ]
Well, they make a point that the use of the www subdomain is redundant and very often meaningless (see the last box of the page).
I agree and disagree at the same time :) It looks right when you read it, but when you think about it, things like news.boost.org, list.boost.org, libs.boost.org makes sense no ? If yes, where would the website be ? www.boost.org. Of course we could establish that the new convention uses domain.org for the website and that subdomains are for other stuffs... but it looks a bit unconsistent. I think the most consistent would be that domain.org lists the subdomains but that's another question :) Don't get me wrong: I'm not against this philosophy its just that removing www.domain.org seems an error as it's very "stuck" in the grand public's minds, but as you suggest that we only remove www. from our communications, why not after all :) Philippe
participants (2)
-
Gennaro Prota -
Philippe Vaucher