Nah - I think the URL is being added to a database, and the ?xxxxx was a
lookup key.

Those DSE links contain 40+ alphanumeric combinations - a bit random for
token-replacement compression.

On Fri, 2002-11-22 at 12:15, Helmut Walle wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, C Falconer wrote:
> 
> > Cool idea - but the user doesn't know what site the link is to and can't
> > judge the usefulness of the link.
> >
> > http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2AD32682
> > http://makeashorterlink.com/?P57D22682
> > http://makeashorterlink.com/?V2BD22682
> >
> > Which of these is useful, which is strange, and which is just plain
> > wrong?
> ...
> 
> Yes, the problem is obvious, it is a little bit like dialling a mobile
> phone number without knowing to whom it belongs. However, they can
> only create these short links by exploiting the hugely excessive
> redundancy in "normal" URLs. By removing most of the redundancy, and
> still coding it unambiguously, they get to the shorter links. The loss
> of human intelligibility is almost unavoidable if you have a simple
> piece of software do this.
> 
> Certainly, a human theoretically could do this much nicer, like change
> 
> www.canterbury.ac.nz/whateverunnecessarilylongfilenametheymightthinkof.html
> 
> [Nothing against UC! I just chose it because someone from UC brought
> it up]
> 
> to      www.canterbury.ac.nz/toolongname.html    which is much
> shorter, but has similar semantics of the filename. BUT, this would
> require that you first check if that filename does not already exist,
> and then, it would have to be the UC server itself who would have to
> provide it, and not some external service. Of course, they could still
> make
> 
> shorturls.com/uc.ac.nz/toolongname.html from it at an external service
> called shorturls.com . But the translation of filenames, maintaining
> the semantics of the name, and this under the boundary condition that
> ambiguities are strictly forbidden, is anything else than trivial and
> would at least require some fancy AI thing.
> 
> I do not say it is impossible, but it might cost a lot. The thing they
> have done lacks beauty, but seems to be comparatively simple and
> straightforward.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Helmut.
> 
> +----------------+
> | Helmut Walle   |
> | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> +----------------+


Reply via email to