Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

mnot.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 105 posts

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#61

Post by chrisweekly »

iamacyborg wrote: post #33
networked wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has recently added `llms.txt` to Chrome's Lighthouse check for agentic browsing ( https://searchengineland.com/google-llms-txt-chrome-lighthou... ), so adoption may be coming. Admittedly, I put more faith in that I copied from Gwern.net. This convention is discoverable (just read the HTML) and naturally adapts to any website size and structure. I have created an `llms.txt` for my website anyhow. I use a fixed…

Giving a markdown version of a page seems like an interesting choice instead of just embedding a schema marked up one

It gets even more "interesting" for markdown-based systems like Astro or Obsidian Publish: author in md -> ship html && optionally serve md?

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#62

Post by chrisweekly »

delichon wrote: post #60
momoraul wrote: post #56

.well-known started tidy and quietly became the junk drawer of the web root. security.txt, ACME, app-site-association, and counting.

A junk drawer is an improvement over scattered junk.

exactly! in fact, that's most of the whole point of .well-known!

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#65

Post by inigyou »

amiga386 wrote: post #48
sandblast wrote: post #11

No, in fact I don't. But this post wouldn't be of any help anyway. It feels like it's about nothing, there is no substance, just stating some obvious facts. Without examples that lead to some real recommendations, this whole expertise claimed by the author is of no use.

> expertise claimed by the author The author is on record as trying to remove HTTP 418 "I'm a teapot" support from NodeJS, which resulted in backlash and Python adding support for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper_Text_Coffee_Pot_Control_...

Back in 2018 when the internet wasn't completely fun, but still more fun than today...

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#66

Post by inigyou »

momoraul wrote: post #56

.well-known started tidy and quietly became the junk drawer of the web root. security.txt, ACME, app-site-association, and counting.

Isn't that the point though? Keeping all the junk in a drawer labeled as junk, instead of keeping it on the kitchen counter?

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#67

Post by inigyou »

sureglymop wrote: post #49
echoangle wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DNS TXT challenge for example. Also better because you can get wildcard certs.

Also, DNS-PERSIST-01 seems to be coming soon for Let's Encrypt, which should allow even people that can't easily dynamically update their DNS records to get wildcard certs. I assume this might become more widely used than HTTP-01 challenges.

I wish someone would write a blog post about the difference between DNS registrars and DNS hosts, because I've seen people assume they need to use a registrar that has an API in order to change their DNS records programmatically. I used to assume that too.

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#68

Post by inigyou »

teddyh wrote: post #45
arcfour wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why discord domain verification instead of domain-verifications with a dynamic list on entries? The TXT record itself is already a dynamic list of entries. It's far simpler and easier to iterate through the list and compare the start of each value with your search string until you find "discord domain verification" directly than it would be to do anything else. Example: ;; ANSWER SECTION: ycombinator.com. 300 IN TX…

Having all those TXT records at the domain apex like that makes the TXT query reply huge , which affects, for instance, every mail recipient who merely wants to check the SPF record. This is a bad pattern to follow.

The better pattern is to use an underscore prefix like _discord-verification.domain.com

If your site allows user-created subdomains it shouldn't allow leading underscore. This is reserved somehow.

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#69

Post by marcosdumay »

russellbeattie wrote: post #29
philipwhiuk wrote: post #25

I'm not sure I like ` https://domain.com/.well-known/robots.txt ` any better frankly

Whoever decided it would be a good idea for ".well-known" to be a "hidden" directory is a complete fool. All it does is provide the opportunity for confusion, misconfiguration, skipped backups, missed git check-ins, forgotten updates and more. Literally the only people a folder like that is hidden from is the whoever is managing the web server. Sure, if everyone knows what they're doing, it's not a problem. But we al…

TBF, those people are already hit with problems on their apache configuration and fixed their tooling long before the lack of .well-known gives them any problem.

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#70

Post by ape4 »

marcosdumay wrote: post #63
momoraul wrote: post #56

.well-known started tidy and quietly became the junk drawer of the web root. security.txt, ACME, app-site-association, and counting.

What do you mean? It was explicitly designed to be a junk drawer.

Why not call it .junk-drawer instead ;)
Post reply on HN