3 ms·

http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI should be required reading for every designer, developer, and stakeholder who is invol

by ammmir 14y ago

http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI should be required reading for every designer, developer, and stakeholder who is involved in building any kind of product on the web.

mmahemoff 14y ago
For sure. And it's funny coming from Obvious. Twitter's traditionally one of the best examples of real-world cool URIs. Hopefully it's just a prototype thing, but you'd think they'd want even these early URLs to be shared with love.
- ammmir 14y ago
  If they're smart, they'll HTTP 301 redirect these old URLs to new ones, if they ever decide to change them. URI design is hard, especially when you're dealing with a single namespace on a site with massive scale like Twitter. But if everyone has their own namespace (it seems Medium is a good candidate for this), then you could as well use a human-readable timestamp in UTC (yyyy/mm/dd/hh-mm-ss), but they might be an eyesore for some. The fashion these days tends to be short, mixed-case, untypable URIs that don't look like they'll stand the test of time.
- jmduke 14y ago
  "Twitter's traditionally one of the best examples of real-world cool URIs." Do you mind expanding on this? I thought hashbangs were a rape and pillage of URI convention.
  - dangrossman 14y ago
    Hashbangs existed for a very short period of Twitter's life. They were a mistake. They're gone now.
    - d0vs 14y ago
      And Twitter is even slower...
      - mmahemoff 14y ago
        Seriously? I found it unbearably slow until the big update a few months ago. I simply couldn't use the website. Now it's fine again.
  - mmahemoff 14y ago
    I wasn't thinking of hashbangs, which will ultimately be noise in the history of Twitter. (I could get into a debate about why they weren't that bad, but it's all (HTML5) history now, so I'll move on.) I was thinking mostly about the clean, namespaced, REST scheme for their API, which you can see at https://dev.twitter.com/docs/api https://dev.twitter.com/docs/api. And it's not just a separate API, as it corresponds closely to the website URLs too. Generally, Twitter and Digg were the best examples of real-world REST implementations around that time. That people like Oatmeal are making fun of the crazy-long Plus URIs [1] shows it's not just RFC longbeards pontificating about The Right way to build web apps. At least some end-users notice and care about this stuff too. 1. http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/12/google-plus-the-oatmeal/ http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/12/google-plus-the-oatmeal/
    - jmduke 14y ago
      This is really interesting. I don't do as much REST API work as I'd like to, and I assumed twitter's scheme was standard rather than a shining exception. Thanks for teaching me something new :)

by ammmir 14y ago

mmahemoff 14y ago

For sure. And it's funny coming from Obvious. Twitter's traditionally one of the best examples of real-world cool URIs. Hopefully it's just a prototype thing, but you'd think they'd want even these early URLs to be shared with love.

ammmir 14y ago
If they're smart, they'll HTTP 301 redirect these old URLs to new ones, if they ever decide to change them. URI design is hard, especially when you're dealing with a single namespace on a site with massive scale like Twitter. But if everyone has their own namespace (it seems Medium is a good candidate for this), then you could as well use a human-readable timestamp in UTC (yyyy/mm/dd/hh-mm-ss), but they might be an eyesore for some. The fashion these days tends to be short, mixed-case, untypable URIs that don't look like they'll stand the test of time.
jmduke 14y ago
"Twitter's traditionally one of the best examples of real-world cool URIs." Do you mind expanding on this? I thought hashbangs were a rape and pillage of URI convention.
- dangrossman 14y ago
  Hashbangs existed for a very short period of Twitter's life. They were a mistake. They're gone now.
  - d0vs 14y ago
    And Twitter is even slower...
    - mmahemoff 14y ago
      Seriously? I found it unbearably slow until the big update a few months ago. I simply couldn't use the website. Now it's fine again.
- mmahemoff 14y ago
  I wasn't thinking of hashbangs, which will ultimately be noise in the history of Twitter. (I could get into a debate about why they weren't that bad, but it's all (HTML5) history now, so I'll move on.) I was thinking mostly about the clean, namespaced, REST scheme for their API, which you can see at https://dev.twitter.com/docs/api https://dev.twitter.com/docs/api. And it's not just a separate API, as it corresponds closely to the website URLs too. Generally, Twitter and Digg were the best examples of real-world REST implementations around that time. That people like Oatmeal are making fun of the crazy-long Plus URIs [1] shows it's not just RFC longbeards pontificating about The Right way to build web apps. At least some end-users notice and care about this stuff too. 1. http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/12/google-plus-the-oatmeal/ http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/12/google-plus-the-oatmeal/
  - jmduke 14y ago
    This is really interesting. I don't do as much REST API work as I'd like to, and I assumed twitter's scheme was standard rather than a shining exception. Thanks for teaching me something new :)