On Dec 15, 2009, at 2:15 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Yes, but those links were supposed to be more portable.
According to who or what? > Or did I misunderstand at some point and they are only interesting for emails? > Else I would never have used them outside of emails since they are not easier > to get In my opinion they're not even good for emails. I hate blind clicking, personally. They were supposed to be a unique identifier for the page so you could get to it even if the name/title of the page changed. However, if the unique identifier didn't transfer over to a new system, maybe it's not even that helpful. Also, if you go to a page whose name has changed confluence will automatically try to figure out which page you meant, and usually does a good job of helping you find the page. For internal links, ie to another part page in confluence, it's really silly to use the external short links when you can refer internally to the pages by name, and confluence will update those links whenever names change. -David > From: "David E Jones" <d...@me.com> >> >> On Dec 15, 2009, at 1:52 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: >> >>> David E Jones wrote: >>>> Well, hopefully we've learned our lesson... >>> >>> "One thing man can learn from history is that man doesn't learn from >>> history" or "Never assume a URL is eternal" - one of those lessons? >> >> Yes, exactly... which is one reason I like URLs with more information in >> them, like the space and page name in normal confluence URLs. It's also nice >> to have an idea about what you're going to get when you go a URL (I >> personally don't like blink clicking...). >> >> -David > >
