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

Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

w3.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 80 posts

Re: Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

#61

Post by OuterVale »

donatj wrote: post #44

I find that every time major companies as well as most authors switch blogging systems even if they maintain their URLs broadly, their RSS feed url breaks.

I've found it the case with many content management systems that they're quite rigid regarding where they'll output feeds and what they'll name those feeds. Lots of rss.xml switching to feed.xml or vice versa between platforms. Or moving to rss.xml under a /feed directory.

Not a reason not to have a redirect, but a reason that this happens.

Re: Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

#62

Post by Gigachad »

phatskat wrote: post #28
torh wrote: post #13

Not that long ago I clicked on a link that Microsoft provided somewhere in Windows -- could have been the event log, I don't remember. I do remember it was for a specific support article, but it ended up at a generic landing page for something. I am not talking about a link from Windows 95, it must have been Windows 10. But regardless, it is all gone. Then again, it probably wasn't a cool URL to begin with. It's amaz…

I bought an air conditioner last year, some wal-mart “smart” AC that was affordable (we had to get three for the new house we moved in to so budget was a big concern) and it has a QR code for the companion app. I finally got around to getting the app this summer and lo and behold, it’s a dead link. Yay.

Even if the link isn't dead, every one of those companion apps will be dead long before the hardware dies because the companies won't pay a developer and the apple developer fee forever.

Re: Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

#63

Post by feldrim »

What's funny to me is that Scot Hanselman, an MS employee, wrote about it for a - not so- long time ago as well: - https://www.hanselman.com/blog/urls-are-ui - https://www.hanselman.com/blog/dont-ever-break-a-url-if-you-...

There are people in MS who knows this is an issue. But knowledge is not equal to behaviour.

Re: Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

#65

Post by bandrami »

toyg wrote: post #22
beached_whale wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft has a terrible habit of doing that. KB's used to have a predicable URL, they may again, but they keep changing them. Or any of their docs really. It's terrible as those URL's end up in other documents to be killed. This is not really an enterprise friendly way of supporting customers.

Yeah, I always wondered how one of the wealthiest companies on earth could be so poor in linking to their own documentation. Then I realized that they have a galaxy of consultants and experts that effectively make a living by keeping on top of all issues and fixing them for a fee. So there is little incentive for them to actually be user-friendly: as long as they are "partner friendly" with timely material, that's go…

Particularly since one of their flagship products is a CMS that solves that problem and lets you move documents around without breaking links

Re: Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

#66

Post by pwdisswordfishq »

bensyverson wrote: post #8
firasd wrote: post #7

What this page doesn't mention is 301 or 302 redirects. SEO has made "old URLs staying live" more of a widespread concern than it was at the time. And WordPress etc ship with inbuilt redirects upon slug rename So to a large extent this has been mitigated and not using the suggestion here, which is to create a permanent URL ontology upfront That said eventually neglect, removal, reorgs (or simply websites going offlin…

Yes but how often in practice does the same information stay accessible via 30x redirects after one reorganization, let alone two or three?

Indeed. Back when I worked at a small software sweatshop^Whouse, I was tasked with migrating the company's static-ish website (a bunch of PHP files) into WordPress. Heeding the linked advice, I carefully set up 301 redirects from the old pages to new ones. When I look up the website now, the redirects are gone. Nobody cared to maintain them.

Re: Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

#67

Post by TylerE »

BoorishBears wrote: post #49
phillipseamore wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm currently in Europe and forgot my Unimouse, hence the purchase. I just tried on 5G and get a Forbidden there as well, open the VPN back to US and then the URL works. I see "en-ca" in your redirec there so likely they don't have a default/fallback redirect. The MX4 is nice but damn if it isn't the heaviest mouse I've pushed around a tabletop.

MX4 finally got me looking elsewhere until I stumbled upon this: https://ergodriven.com/products/the-vertical-handshake-mouse I got it specifically because they had a mini rant about the weight of switches that other vertical mice use, and while I couldn't tell if that was a real problem, that's the kind of mentality I used to ascribe to Logitech. The MX4 is clearly marketing logic. The haptic feature adds nothing of…

I'm a big fan of the Zowie EC mice. Basically (egonomically) a clone of ye old Microsoft Intellimouse (From the late 90s/early 2000s when MS actually made good hardware), except with modern guts and available in 3 sizes. For my hand the most comfortable mice every created.

Re: Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

#68

Post by silon42 »

Xirdus wrote: post #58
rendaw wrote: post #56

URLs are URIs and URLs include "how to access this" which fundamentally makes it hard to prevent them from changing. If it were an abstract ID, like a UUID, or a hash or something I'd get it. So are all URLs bad URIs?

The "R" in URL is a misnomer. Designers of the early internet really wanted internet to be made of documents. It turned out the internet is actually made of interactive apps and services. Hence the impedance mismatch between terms and their practical meaning. URL was supposed to be used to locate resources in the resouce-oriented internet - instead, in the service-oriented internet, URL is a language of sorts for mak…

That's why browsers need to change "bookmark" to also create a local snapshot of the page (on every visit).

Re: Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

#69

Post by Joker_vD »

zkmon wrote: post #51

The concept of hooking onto a URL, for years, is a bad thing. It prohibits the URL owners from changing it. It's not 90's. You have search engines now to get to content. It's almost same as bookmarking an IP address, and complaining that the change has frustrated you, or someone scribbled the IP address on the margin of a letter. I usually bookmark a link only to come back to a few days/weeks later. I don't expect a…

> It prohibits the URL owners from changing it.

That's mostly about the social contract: if you publish something on the Internet, should it be made easier for the readers/users to access, or for you to move the thing around for whatever silly reason?

> I let the URL owners to have freedom to change it.

You know, you used the term "URL owners" twice, and I think I have a fundamental problem with this concept. The publisher ought not to own the URL, it really ought to belong to the consumers.

> A thing that changes or goes away, feels natural.

Yeah, but the URL is not a thing of nature, it's manufactured, and its original intent was that it was manufactured to last.

> An URL that didn't change in 20 years, actually freaks me out, like a non-degradable plastic.

A URL that doesn't change shares zero problems that non-biodegradable plastic has. In fact, the constantly changing URLs do have a couple of problems similar.

Also, you can try a different metaphor, like e.g. a rock or a mountain. It's a freaky thing, innit? Always there, unchanging... until people with excavators show up and turn a mountain into a quarry (which happened to several mountains, actually). Take it, nature!

Re: Cool URIs Don't Change (1998)

#70

Post by Cthulhu_ »

torh wrote: post #13

Not that long ago I clicked on a link that Microsoft provided somewhere in Windows -- could have been the event log, I don't remember. I do remember it was for a specific support article, but it ended up at a generic landing page for something. I am not talking about a link from Windows 95, it must have been Windows 10. But regardless, it is all gone. Then again, it probably wasn't a cool URL to begin with. It's amaz…

Very uncool; Microsoft even uses an URL shortener for most of their links (from windows etc) so that they can theoretically change where the user ends up at if the original page is replaced for whatever reason.

But they shouldn't. Microsoft especially should make all of their documentation pages plain static HTML pages and keep them available forever.

But also, any Windows documentation can live offline in the OS itself. At least nowadays, I get how in the windows 98 / XP era they wanted to reduce disk usage.

Post reply on HN