[Web4lib] A very basic quesiont on library home page URL format

[Michael McCulley]

A helpful starting point..
http://www.w3.org/Addressing/URL/url-spec.html

See also
http://www.webreference.com/html/tutorial2/2.html

In general, "www" became a convention early on in the Internet Daze
beginnings, and became customary as part of the host name part of an URL.
Browsers also in the early Daze had to recognize the URLs and host name
portions with more limitations than today's browsers. The Internet's Domain
Name System (DNS) is also more sophisticated.

Virtual host names, ghost names, alias names are all part of the naming
options that may and can be used in configurations for networked servers
connected to the Internet. In most cases, there are long-established
practices such as using www.x.x. as part of the host name in URLs. The
subdomain library.umass.edu is another part of the naming styles that have
been used, and can be powerful tools in organizing access and providing
simple, common doorways for access, and for managing the servers in a
networked environment.

Early versions of Netscape and Mosiac had to have the "www" to find and
access most servers via an URL. When IE came along, it "broke" the
convention and provided translation for the domain name without requiring
the "www" to exist as a name, DNS entry, or alias, etc. Thus, we got a more
complex naming world, but also it "saved the time" somewhat of users who
liked short-and-sweet and easier to type entries.

Today's practices are more likely to include standard alias in the /root
files to enable multiple access points, so www.umass.edu/library and
library.umass.edu and umass.edu/library might all "go" to the same server
entry point or index file. The best thing I can suggest is to talk with the
campus network architecture team --who are managing these names and files
for your entire network. Ask them what works in their environment, and
discuss changes for better usability or access with them.

Hope this helps.. and p.s. I'm away more today from this world than in the
past, so current network gurus and engineers and Webmasters, please correct
me where I'm wrong :).

Best,
DrWeb

-- 
P. Michael McCulley aka DrWeb
mailto:drweb at san.rr.com
San Diego, CA 
http://drweb.typepad.com/

Quote of the Moment:
 How sharper than a hound's tooth it is to have a thankless serpent.
Thursday, June 02, 2005 6:27:09 PM 
 
>-----Original Message-----
>From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org 
>[mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Char!ie
>Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 5:53 PM
>To: web4lib at webjunction.org
>Subject: [Web4lib] A very basic quesiont on library home page 
>URL format
>
>Pardon for this basic question on URL addresses for the 
>library, but before
>we change our listing of it in our various materials I wanted 
>to see if I
>wasn't missing something obvious.
>
> 
>
>In the past, we've always divided up our URL addresses by 
>type/location,
>like
>
>-        the online catalog would be http://voyager.lib.umassd.edu
><http://voyager.lib.umassd.edu/> 
>
>-        the library web home page would be http://www.lib.umassd.edu
><http://www.lib.umassd.edu/> 
>
>-        the eReserves system would be http://eres.lib.umassd.edu
><http://eres.lib.umassd.edu/> 
>
>-        etc.
>
> 
>
>Is there any reason why, since it is our main entry point, 
>that the library
>home page shouldn't just be referred to as http://library.umassd.edu
><http://library.umassd.edu/>  ?
>
> 
>
>Actually, it works now, but we've always referred to it with the www in
>front, I guess to note that it is a web page and not a system 
>of some sort
>(maybe a past nod to a specific protocol)..and I note that 
>most libraries
>seem to stick to this www format (not all!!).
>
> 
>
>Sorry if it's too basic, but I couldn't think of a particular 
>reason why we
>shouldn't make the change, so I just had to ask the experts. 
>Am I missing
>something obvious?
>
> 
>
>Charlie
>
> 
>
>cmcneil at umassd.edu
>
>systems & digital services librarian
>
>UMass Dartmouth Library