Some things that bug me about URIs:
page-name.some-technology
Why does the user care if it's a php, html, asp or whatever file? Either turn extensions off on your server, or use and index file in each seperate directory. Also on this, don't link to, or publicise a URI as /folder-name/index.php, always remove the index.php.
information-architecture through folders
If a folder name contributes some sort of information to the user, then use it, if it doesn't, then dont! For example, a URI of /deptartments/whitegoods. Is the fact that "whitegoods" or whatever is a "department" useful information to the user? If not, then don't include it. The reason some sites use this structure? To keep folders organised... scary.
technology based uris
www.somedomain.com/some-type-of-script.php?var1=kk3nn3&var2=blahblahblah
Ahhh these are the worst! It's basically lazy programming that causes this, and there is little reason not to correct it (unless your using some awful CMS that doesn't let you change this). These URIs are difficult to email and near impossible to read out and/or write down. Bookmarking these can often cause problems as well, because these URIs may only be valid for a short time.
This article offers some good ideas on this:
http://www.sitepoint.com/article/guide-url-rewriting
subdomains - avoid if possible (this will probably be contentious :))
1. Most people don't know that www isn't necessary at the front of a web-URI
2. www.example.com is instantly recognisable as a URI, sub.example.com isn't necessarily
3. More people are familiar with the standard www.example.com/folder/ than sub.example.com
4. If you get the "sub" part of sub.example.com wrong, you will get a "server not found" type message. If you get the "folder" part of www.example.com/folder , the server can handle the 404 not found error, and provide a friendly error message.
5. Branding issues - eg. www.printers.ibm.com Am I visiting a printer website that sells IBM printers? Or is this IBM's website about their printers?
This w3 web quality tip also offers some good points:
http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/uri-choose
Sorry for the rant/thread hijacking :)
Daniel Nitsche
On 3/20/06, Wendy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sarah Peeke (XERT) wrote:
>> Joseph R. B. Taylor wrote:
>>
>>
>>> How do YOU set up your directories?
>>>
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I agree with Jay, and pretty much use the same structure.
>
> Regarding images, I also break them up a little by giving them a name
> which helps me find them later (certainly useful on larger sites):
>
> eg
> staff_name1.jpg
> staff_name2.jpg
> ...
> staff_name9.jpg
>
> product_name1.jpg
> product_name2.jpg
> ...
> product_name9.jpg
>
> etc.
>
> HTH
> Sarah :)
>
And while this probably makes little to no difference, I label image
folders "i" rather than "images" - easier to type, certainly, and just
might save a megamillisecond or two.
> BTW I'm certainly no guru either, but thought I'd offer my 2c!!
>
Me, neither, and me, too!
Cheers,
Wendy
>
>
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
