Re: to www or not?

This was discussed a few weeks ago in our local newspaper (the Toronto Star).

The bottom line was:

1.  whether the "www." is necessary depends on the host.  For my host, it 
is optional.

2.  there is a growing trend to drop the "www." when listing URLs in print 
media, just as "http://" was dropped earlier.

I myself wonder whether dropping the "www." is wise, especially as new TLDs 
are added.  Imagine:  when a TLD such as ".travel" is created, will people 
seeing "something.travel" quickly realize that this is a web 
address?  People will not be used to the new TLDs until they are common.

At 11:34 AM 11/01/00, you wrote:
>I have yet to see a discussion on the use of www. in a url address. It
>seems
>that more and more urls do not require the addition of the "www." in the
>
>address. Somewhere I read that it was a server issue, but then someone
>told
>me that it was a browser issue. I tend to believe that it is how the
>server is
>setup, on whether one needs to use it or not. One example of where it is
>
>needed (or the last time I checked) is on www.adobe.com....which of
>course
>everyone knows, is a major, major software company. Why would a few
>companies still have their servers setup to need  the www. portion of an
>address.
>Seems like it would be a logical move to eliminate it?....anyone know
>more about
>how this works? ......Ellen

-
Chuck Upsdell
Email:     cupsdell(at)istar.ca or cupsdell(at)torfree.net
Website:   http://home.istar.ca/~cupsdell/

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA