3 ms·
I'm sorry, I haven't explained my motivation well enough: URLs are "machine text", not "human text". Practical examples would be: Easier to spot phishing URLs
by cool-RR 17y ago
I'm sorry, I haven't explained my motivation well enough:
URLs are "machine text", not "human text".
Practical examples would be: Easier to spot phishing URLs, easier to mark and edit parts of the URLs.
In fixed-width font every character has the same width. Useful in coding mostly because succeeding lines are aligned precisely to each other. But, to get a little more philosophical, it also gives the message of: "Every character is equally important". For example, a dot is very important in code, and it has the same width as other characters in a fixed-width font. But in "human text" dots, while still important, have a tiny width.
In a URL a dot is very important, and thus shouldn't have a tiny width. It often happens to me that I want to select text before/after the dot in a URL but it's so hard to do it precisely because the dot is so small.
- danhak 17y ago> URLs are "machine text", not "human text". This is no longer true. Partly as a consequence of SEO concerns, most URLs are now extremely descriptive of the resources to which they point.
- cool-RR 17y agoInteresting. But even if they are descriptive, I don't think this will mean they're now human-text instead of machine-text. After all, code is ideally descriptive as well.
- wgj 17y agoit also gives the message of: "Every character is equally important". That's a perceptive insight. I never thought of it that way before.