Posted by Michael Winter on 10/10/01 11:38

On 27/01/2006 00:52, d wrote:

[snip]

> I don't code sites for just your average user. If you're selling
> your company, or indeed a product, to people who know, then things
> like this speak very highly of the attention you pay to your work.

Assuming that those 'who know' agree with your particular philosophy. As
evidenced in this thread, not all will and that may lead to a negative
evaluation of your capabilities.

[snip]

[MLW:]
>> If you were really concerned about this, wouldn't the best solution
>> be to remove 'extensions' from URLs entirely? [...] hiding the
>> mechanics should be the ultimate goal.
>
> Now you have it :)

It's not exactly a new idea.

[snip]

>> [...] you haven't actually stated what these tests specifically
>> entailed [...]
>
> I did.

You gave a vague description.

[snip]

> My site engine uses ONLY human-readable urls. No digits, no
> ridiculous query strings (in fact no query strings at all), and all
> can be interpreted and even re-written by the user if they want.

And that's fine, laudable. It means nothing as far as 'extensions' in
URLs are concerned, though.

Mike

--
Michael Winter
Prefix subject with [News] before replying by e-mail.

[Back to original message]