3 ms·
> The NYDN must take the blame here for giving me the URL that it did. Nope, you get the blame for not editing the junk out of the URL; the filter here isn't e
by sorbus 16y ago
> The NYDN must take the blame here for giving me the URL that it did.
Nope, you get the blame for not editing the junk out of the URL; the filter here isn't especially smart, and merely adding a # to the end of a URL makes it think it's different. Know the limitations of the technology you use, and change your behaviors appropriately (or change the technology).
EDIT: I see that at least five people disagree with me. My reasoning is mostly related to the fact that, when I submit articles, I get the URLs from an RSS reader, which invariably means that there's a huge amount of junk at the end. So I edit it down to the smallest URL that works (sometimes stopping several times to make sure that the URL still works), because that's the polite thing to do (both to people opening the article and to the filter). Shifting the blame for not doing so to the entity provide you with the URL isn't, in my mind, the correct thing to do. Others may disagree with me.
- mikecane 16y agoI've seen RSS-extracted URLs like that here. But this was not one of them. The headline came up on a news site and I simply clicked through. I never expected extraneous stuff in the URL because that's never happened before using the news site. I usually get clean URLs.