Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Tram-mļöi  hhâsmařpţuktôx

(1/5) > >>

Arizona Hot:

tomos:
no idea what it's about,
but that was just begging for a screenshot:
https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=2625.msg300074#msg300074

40hz:
"On the contrary, I think it may turn out that this rugged mountain range trails off at some point."

-------------------

@ArizonaHot - Good gracious! Ithkuil? (And I thought I was a geek!) Are you that into languages? :tellme:

(BTW -  if you think I'm gonna spend two hours trying to work out a message written in friggin' Içtaîl script - you're dreaming!  :P )

 8)

Curt:
@ArizonaHot - Good gracious! (url=http://www.ithkuil.net/index.htm) Ithkuil
-40hz (September 15, 2012, 09:21 PM)
--- End quote ---

proper URL is without the triple w: http://ithkuil.net

40hz:
@ArizonaHot - Good gracious! (url=http://www.ithkuil.net/index.htm) Ithkuil
-40hz (September 15, 2012, 09:21 PM)
--- End quote ---

proper URL is without the triple w: http://ithkuil.net


-Curt (September 16, 2012, 02:34 AM)
--- End quote ---

Hi Curt! That's news to me.   :huh:

I always thought that was an SEO consideration for the site owner rather than a visitor issue.

It's true that, from a search engine perspective, there is a difference between xyz.com and www.xyz.com. But this isn't something that affects anything on the user level unless xyz.com is a subdomain - in which case the leading www would need to be omitted when browsing to it. However, last I heard, "best practice" was to use the www.xyz.com form as your canonical URL - unless you already had a Google ranking. And if you did, you needed to find out which format got more hits, and then redirect the other to the more popular one.

Since I only very rarely run into situations where the leading www has to be removed in order to get to a website, my rule of thumb is to include it. In the past, most site developers I've talked to said they use the "www + redirect" trick for SEO purposes. So from a visitor's perspective "to www or not to www" shouldn't matter either way.

But it's been a while since I was last involved in web stuff. Has the above convention since changed? :o

-----

Note: I always test the links in anything I post so at least I know they work even if they're not 'proper' URLS. Besides, most forum and e-mail software will assume a text string that starts with 'www.' is a URL and aromatically treat it as a link. So I think it's generally more convenient to keep the www in a posting unless it causes problems. :up:

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page