> > > > On Mar 26, 2004, at 06:05, Rajasekaran Deepak wrote: > > > >> A proposed quality tip, "URI Usability", is attached. > >> > >> <http://students.iiit.net/~deepakr/uri-usability/> > > > > > Comments on tip: > > 1) "URIs must normally not have extensions" > goes against much practice ... > (that's not disagreeing but wanting to see what others say) I > wonder if stating it more in terms of benefits would be more > effective. > > e.g. > "On many servers, URIs include a file extension corresponding > to the mime type, or a directory name indicating the > language, however, it often works better to exclude the file > extension and language from the URI and make better use of > content negotiation." I'd agree with this. It strikes me as being too harsh implying that the well established convention of use of .html (etc) extensions is wrong. I think Jeremy's wording is better in encouraging people to do better, rather than telling them what they've been doing for many years is bad. Brian --------------------------------------- Brian Kelly UK Web Focus UKOLN University of Bath BATH BA2 7AY Email: B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk Web: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ Phone: 01225 383943 FOAF: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly/foaf/bkelly-foaf.xrdf For info on FOAF see http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly/foaf/Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2004 07:12:27 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:35 UTC