Duane Clark wrote:
>
> Mark Anderson wrote:
>
> > Duane Clark wrote:
> >
> >> Mark Anderson wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> End users should be given the option of what to do in this scenario.
> >>> Not to interpret the link as a relative one, when logic tells me that
> >>> this would be wrong (despite the 95-99% figure thrown about here, I've
> >>> yet to see a *single* link in my years of Web surfing that uses this
> >>> broken syntax to indicate a relative link).
> >>
> >> A bug report has been filed about this "bug" on bugzilla 14
> >> different times, by 14 different people. And I will bet that the
> >> archives of these newsgroups contain more reports, such as mine, that
> >> never made it into bugzilla.
> >>
> >> Likely the reason you have never seen such link in the past
> >> is because the browser you were using handled it in the way the web page
> >> creator expected. And that is because the web page creator used one of
> >> those browsers to test his pages.
> >
> >
> > No. I didn't say that. I said I haven't seen one. That means zero. I
> > do actually look where my links are being pointed to, most of the time.
>
> Running Netscape 4.76, the link
> <A HREF="http:/fmf/wwwpages/fmf_models.html">
>
> is displayed as
> http://vhdl.org/fmf/wwwpages/fmf_models.html
Which I would immediately consider to be incorrect. That link, to me,
refers to a directory /wwwpages with a page called fmf_models.html on a
local intranet server named fmf. Your interpretation is different.
Which is why a blanket interpretation doesn't work.
> So there are three possibilities that I can think of. You have always used
> a different browser
Nope. I've used Netscape and Mozilla, and IE and Opera only when
absolutely necessary.
> or you always viewed the page source.
Nope.
> Or you did not
> realize that the links were in fact "bad", because they looked right and
> acted right.
I look at links in the status bar. Such an URL immediately jumps out to
me as odd.
I'd like to introduce possibility D: that this problem really isn't
widespread and that I really never *have* seen a page with such a
horrible link.
In any case, you've still not suggested a reason why giving the user the
choice (rather than assuming your way) is wrong. (And yes, it's not
implemented that way, but there's the definite possibility of an RFE.)
What kind of shoddy HTML generator actually puts out links like that,
anyway? Or were people hand-coding pages with incorrect links (which
strikes me as odd, because hand-coders tend to be the ones who know the
specs inside and out)? And does this really happen on any high-profile
site, or is it as niche as I think it must be?
