Re: URL length

by Robin Liston <rliston(at)cox.net>

 Date:  Tue, 12 Feb 2002 14:22:32 -0800
 To:  hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org
 In-Reply-To: 
  todo: View Thread, Original
The worst I heard on the radio was for the movie Captain Corellis Mandolin. 
i.e. "visit www.captaincorellismandolin.com today for more info". Not only 
did they NOT spell it out over the radio, but it turns out the correct URL 
actually has hyphens in it (http://www.captain-corellis-mandolin.com/). I 
couldn't even spell it for this e-mail, I had to look it up. Talk about 
non-intuitive!

Be sure and find out if they ever plan to have the URL read out on the 
radio or TV.

My vote is for shorter URLs. I hate trying to pick out the typo in a long 
URL in the tiny address bar. My favorite short version is bn.com for Barnes 
& Noble :-)

At 09:05 AM 02/12/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Hello everyone,
>
>I have been going back and forth with a client about the length of a url 
>for his new website.  According to an Alert Box from Jakob Nielsen that's 
>3 years old, he says names need to be short and easy to type.  Makes 
>sense.  But, since people are more and more using bookmarks and search 
>engines to find sites, I'm wondering if it's ok now for urls to be much 
>longer and descriptive so they can be used in ads.  My client wants to use 
>the url in ads and that would be the name of the company as well.  For 
>instance, www.VermontBeautifulApartments.com instead of www.vba.com?
>
>I was the one saying it needs to be short, but maybe it doesn't.  Any 
>insights.
>--
>John McConnell
>Narwhal Design
>126 Covered Bridge Road
>North Ferrisburgh, VT  05473
>802.425.7037
>john(at)narwhaldesign.com
>http://www.narwhaldesign.com

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