Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Alexander Gounder]

dear all

even is if / is repeated more than once in any URL, it is interpreted by
most browsers as just one /

You can try this on any site you visit which has subfolders.but if the
website is using a external CSS and images in another subfolder it won't
show.
for e.g. the pages is domain.com/pages/page1.html, using images "../images/"
then there could be some problem, though the page will still show.

Alexander
www.ecreeds.com

On Feb 1, 2008 3:31 AM, Taco Fleur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  Hello all,
>
> quick question; we signed up for scanalert.com and been given some HTML
> code to place a icon on our search engine www.clickfind.com.au
>
> I placed the code on the pages without really paying attention to it,
> after a while I discovered the image was linked as
> src="//images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif"
>
> I never seen this before, but it worked! I changed it to src="
> http://images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif";
> and now it doesn't seem to load anymore, for an example see:
> http://www.clickfind.com.au/about-clickfind.cfm right next to Yahoo Web
> Service the scanalert icon should load.
>
> I have no idea whether the way they linked to the image is valid, does
> anyone know? I guess if it is, linking to the images that way would overcome
> any issues with linking to an image over HTTP or HTTPS
>
>
> Kind regards, Taco Fleur
> --
>
> *clickfind™ 1300 859 179*
> www.clickfind.com.au the new Australian search engine for businesses,
> products and services …
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

[James Ellis]

Hi

That's a common enough response when dealing with standards based
implementations from companies that either:
* do know and don't care
* don't know and are scared/worried
* do know, do care but don't have the resources
* do know but implementation would have internal political implications
(I've experienced this a few times)

It's a common enough path, to paraphrase some other quotes I've seen around:
1. I don't want or need to know
2. What's this ?
3. Could be useful...
4. Let's implement it..
5. Wow, that was easy.
6. Advocate...

Personally, I wouldn't be too concerned about responses like that -
especially given the two code examples are easily eliminated or placed
elsewhere to be non obstrusive. Anyone who uses border="0" then complains
that it is too difficult to change is either too lazy or shouldn't be doing
web development, or both.

As for W3C standards not being widely implemented and other generalisations
- bit of a throwaway line to get you to go away.

J

On Feb 2, 2008 6:44 AM, David Hucklesby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 11:10:04 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote:
> > On a different note:
> > Just been speaking with ScanAlert, I tried to get them to understand
> that their code
> > does not validate since they used oncontextmenu, and border="0" - I got
> a response
> > saying that W3C standards is not widely accepted!
> >
> > Microsoft is not using it, Google is not using it and all other big
> companies are not
> > using it in the US. Apparently they did a lot of research on this! I had
> to laugh, but
> > then again, who am I, I could be wrong and they could be right... Maybe
> Google and the
> > rest really don't care, I personally don't think so, but I'm just
> following the crowd!
> > ;-)
>
>


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] linking to images with //

[David Hucklesby]

On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 11:10:04 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote:
> On a different note:
> Just been speaking with ScanAlert, I tried to get them to understand that 
> their code
> does not validate since they used oncontextmenu, and border="0" - I got a 
> response
> saying that W3C standards is not widely accepted!
>
> Microsoft is not using it, Google is not using it and all other big companies 
> are not
> using it in the US. Apparently they did a lot of research on this! I had to 
> laugh, but
> then again, who am I, I could be wrong and they could be right... Maybe 
> Google and the
> rest really don't care, I personally don't think so, but I'm just following 
> the crowd!
> ;-)
>

Bringing this thread on-topic ;)  -

"All" other big companies in the US are not using standards?

I think ScanAlert is mistaken about Google. I think Google cares very 
much about standards, and breaks standards quite deliberately when
visitor experience is improved by doing it. Much like Picasso broke 
the "rules" - but only after becoming highly proficient in what one
could call "standards-based" painting.

There is a difference between knowing the rules well enough to know
when to break them, and not "using" them.

Cordially,
David
--




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Taco Fleur]

This is interesting!

Are saying it should be src="://images.scanalert.com. Instead of
src="//images.scanalert.com ?

I have not tested it in any other browser than i.e6 and firefox 2

The only reason I found out about the way it was coded was because I got a
report of 404 errors, so I'm thinking you might be right in regards to it
working in some browsers and not in others. 

I got a few 404 errors like
http://www.clickfind.com.au//images.scanalert.com. So I'm guessing the
browser did not detect the schema there.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of James Ellis
Sent: Friday, 1 February 2008 8:45 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

Hi
It's a bit difficult to work out what is going one given the image itself
seems to be a 1x1 transparent gif. You may find that your browser is
blocking these as they most likely represent "web bugs", causing the issue
you see.

the HTML spec redirects URI info to RFC2396. In section "3. URI Syntactic
Components" it gives a URI syntax as "://?"
Further in on section 3.1 it reads:
"Relative URI references are distinguished from absolute URI in that
   they do not begin with a scheme name.  Instead, the scheme is
   inherited from the base URI, as described in Section 5.2."

So, you may actually be finding that a URI without a scheme is inheriting
from the "base URI". Section 5.1.3 describes how a base URI could be
constructed from the retrieval URI, which I am reading that if no scheme is
present the document scheme is used (http / https / ftp / scp etc etc).

That being said, this is only an RFC so any support of it may be a fluke.
Did you test the issue over various browsers or just one?

HTH
james



On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 09:01:03 am Taco Fleur wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> quick question; we signed up for scanalert.com and been given some 
> HTML code to place a icon on our search engine www.clickfind.com.au
>
> I placed the code on the pages without really paying attention to it, 
> after a while I discovered the image was linked as 
> src="//images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif"
>
> I never seen this before, but it worked! I changed it to 
> src="http://images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif";
> and now it doesn't seem to load anymore, for an example see:
> http://www.clickfind.com.au/about-clickfind.cfm right next to Yahoo 
> Web Service the scanalert icon should load.
>
> I have no idea whether the way they linked to the image is valid, does 
> anyone know? I guess if it is, linking to the images that way would 
> overcome any issues with linking to an image over HTTP or HTTPS
>
>
> Kind regards, Taco Fleur
>
>
>   _
>
> clickfindT 1300 859 179
> www.clickfind.com.au <http://www.clickfind.com.au/>  the new 
> Australian search engine for businesses, products and services .
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Taco Fleur]

ooh sorry, I thought it had to do with standards...
My apologies. Thread closed.

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adam Martin
Sent: Friday, 1 February 2008 11:17 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] linking to images with //


Can we please keep the discussions on topic, lately there have been a number
of threads having nothing to do with standards
Cheers
Adam


On Feb 1, 2008 10:04 AM, Taco Fleur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Do you check your logs for 404s?

Like I said, when I published the code as they presented it, I got some 404
errors from browsers looking for the image on our domain.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Cummiskey
Sent: Friday, 1 February 2008 9:46 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

Anders Nawroth wrote:

>
> "//" in the beginning of the URI says this is a network path.
> I have no idea of how the browser support for this is, or how they
> choose to interpret it.


scanalert/hackersafe publishes their badges with the  method.

I've yet to see a problem with it.



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***






-- 
-
http://myfitness.ning.com
A community of people that care about their health and fitness
Free fitness videos, recipes, blogs, photos etc.
-- 
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Adam Martin]

Can we please keep the discussions on topic, lately there have been a number
of threads having nothing to do with standards
Cheers
Adam

On Feb 1, 2008 10:04 AM, Taco Fleur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Do you check your logs for 404s?
>
> Like I said, when I published the code as they presented it, I got some
> 404
> errors from browsers looking for the image on our domain.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Brian Cummiskey
> Sent: Friday, 1 February 2008 9:46 AM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: Re: [WSG] linking to images with //
>
> Anders Nawroth wrote:
>
> >
> > "//" in the beginning of the URI says this is a network path.
> > I have no idea of how the browser support for this is, or how they
> > choose to interpret it.
>
>
> scanalert/hackersafe publishes their badges with the  src="//path/image.gif" /> method.
>
> I've yet to see a problem with it.
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


-- 
-
http://myfitness.ning.com
A community of people that care about their health and fitness
Free fitness videos, recipes, blogs, photos etc.
--


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Taco Fleur]

On a different note:
Just been speaking with ScanAlert, I tried to get them to understand that
their code does not validate since they used oncontextmenu, and border="0" -
I got a response saying that W3C standards is not widely accepted! 
 
Microsoft is not using it, Google is not using it and all other big
companies are not using it in the US. Apparently they did a lot of research
on this! I had to laugh, but then again, who am I, I could be wrong and they
could be right... Maybe Google and the rest really don't care, I personally
don't think so, but I'm just following the crowd! ;-)
 

Kind regards, Taco Fleur


  _  

clickfindT 1300 859 179
www.clickfind.com.au   the new Australian
search engine for businesses, products and services . 





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Taco Fleur]

Do you check your logs for 404s?

Like I said, when I published the code as they presented it, I got some 404
errors from browsers looking for the image on our domain.  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Cummiskey
Sent: Friday, 1 February 2008 9:46 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

Anders Nawroth wrote:

> 
> "//" in the beginning of the URI says this is a network path.
> I have no idea of how the browser support for this is, or how they 
> choose to interpret it.


scanalert/hackersafe publishes their badges with the  method.

I've yet to see a problem with it.



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Ben Buchanan]

I placed the code on the pages without really paying attention to it, after
> a while I discovered the image was linked as
> src="//images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif"
> I never seen this before, but it worked! I changed it to src="
> http://images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif";
> and now it doesn't seem to load anymore, for an example see:
> http://www.clickfind.com.au/about-clickfind.cfm right next to Yahoo Web
> Service the scanalert icon should load.
> I have no idea whether the way they linked to the image is valid, does
> anyone know?
>

I've seen this before
but only in conjunction with Javascript that (we think) was completing
the URI before requesting the graphic. We actually had the opposite
issue though - without the full URI in our markup the whole page would
freeze until the // request timed out.


So I'm also curious to see what people here can tell us about this method!

> I guess if it is, linking to the images that way would overcome any issues
with linking to an image over HTTP or HTTPS

We thought it was probably something to do with that too.


-- 
--- 
--- The future has arrived; it's just not
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Taco Fleur]

>In the other discussion it was more around how to deal with http and https
CSS images references when the image was remote. The accepted solution goven
by all was to use two different CSS files. My friend Ryan Joy noted
(http://www.atxryan.com/2008/01/22/breaking-with-protocol/
) that using this '//' solved the issue in that it assumes whatever protocol
being used by the delivered server.

That's what I thought it would be useful for as well. The question still
remains; does it work in all browsers? I guess we've cleared up the fact
that it is allowed to reference to an image like this.



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Taco Fleur]

Well, thats the question here.
 
It seems to work without in some browsers (if I'm not mistaken).
 
 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of kate
Sent: Friday, 1 February 2008 8:31 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] linking to images with //


Hi,
Should'nt that be

Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Paul Menard]

On Jan 31, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Anders Nawroth wrote:



"//" in the beginning of the URI says this is a network path.
I have no idea of how the browser support for this is, or how they  
choose to interpret it.


A single "/" in the beginning says this URI is relative to the  
domain of the document. So in a sense it's absolute, but the scheme  
and domain are omitted.

Browser support for this is excellent.

Can't find the correct references at the moment.

/andersN



Interesting that this is the second discussion of the '//' notation  
I've seen across 2 different mailing lists.


In the other discussion it was more around how to deal with http and  
https CSS images references when the image was remote. The accepted  
solution goven by all was to use two different CSS files. My friend  
Ryan Joy noted (http://www.atxryan.com/2008/01/22/breaking-with-protocol/ 
) that using this '//' solved the issue in that it assumes whatever  
protocol being used by the delivered server.


Paul Menard
Paul Menard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://codehooligans.com



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Brian Cummiskey]

Anders Nawroth wrote:



"//" in the beginning of the URI says this is a network path.
I have no idea of how the browser support for this is, or how they 
choose to interpret it.



scanalert/hackersafe publishes their badges with the src="//path/image.gif" /> method.


I've yet to see a problem with it.



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

[kate]

Hi,
Should'nt that be

Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

[Anders Nawroth]

James Ellis skrev:

"Relative URI references are distinguished from absolute URI in that
   they do not begin with a scheme name.  Instead, the scheme is
   inherited from the base URI, as described in Section 5.2."


"//" in the beginning of the URI says this is a network path.
I have no idea of how the browser support for this is, or how they 
choose to interpret it.


A single "/" in the beginning says this URI is relative to the domain of 
the document. So in a sense it's absolute, but the scheme and domain are 
omitted.

Browser support for this is excellent.

Can't find the correct references at the moment.

/andersN



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] linking to images with //

[James Ellis]

Hi
It's a bit difficult to work out what is going one given the image itself 
seems to be a 1x1 transparent gif. You may find that your browser is blocking 
these as they most likely represent "web bugs", causing the issue you see.

the HTML spec redirects URI info to RFC2396. In section "3. URI Syntactic 
Components" it gives a URI syntax as "://?"
Further in on section 3.1 it reads:
"Relative URI references are distinguished from absolute URI in that
   they do not begin with a scheme name.  Instead, the scheme is
   inherited from the base URI, as described in Section 5.2."

So, you may actually be finding that a URI without a scheme is inheriting from 
the "base URI". Section 5.1.3 describes how a base URI could be constructed 
from the retrieval URI, which I am reading that if no scheme is present the 
document scheme is used (http / https / ftp / scp etc etc).

That being said, this is only an RFC so any support of it may be a fluke. Did 
you test the issue over various browsers or just one?

HTH
james



On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 09:01:03 am Taco Fleur wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> quick question; we signed up for scanalert.com and been given some HTML
> code to place a icon on our search engine www.clickfind.com.au
>
> I placed the code on the pages without really paying attention to it, after
> a while I discovered the image was linked as
> src="//images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif"
>
> I never seen this before, but it worked! I changed it to
> src="http://images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif";
> and now it doesn't seem to load anymore, for an example see:
> http://www.clickfind.com.au/about-clickfind.cfm right next to Yahoo Web
> Service the scanalert icon should load.
>
> I have no idea whether the way they linked to the image is valid, does
> anyone know? I guess if it is, linking to the images that way would
> overcome any issues with linking to an image over HTTP or HTTPS
>
>
> Kind regards, Taco Fleur
>
>
>   _
>
> clickfindT 1300 859 179
> www.clickfind.com.au   the new Australian
> search engine for businesses, products and services .
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

[WSG] linking to images with //

[Taco Fleur]

Hello all,
 
quick question; we signed up for scanalert.com and been given some HTML code
to place a icon on our search engine www.clickfind.com.au 
 
I placed the code on the pages without really paying attention to it, after
a while I discovered the image was linked as
src="//images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif"
 
I never seen this before, but it worked! I changed it to
src="http://images.scanalert.com/meter/www.clickfind.com.au/12gif";
and now it doesn't seem to load anymore, for an example see:
http://www.clickfind.com.au/about-clickfind.cfm right next to Yahoo Web
Service the scanalert icon should load.
 
I have no idea whether the way they linked to the image is valid, does
anyone know? I guess if it is, linking to the images that way would overcome
any issues with linking to an image over HTTP or HTTPS
 

Kind regards, Taco Fleur


  _  

clickfindT 1300 859 179
www.clickfind.com.au   the new Australian
search engine for businesses, products and services . 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***