Slightly OT about urls

[Tim]

On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 10:44 +1000, Roger wrote:
> In this particular case it would be  handy if the url remained
> constant.  All the viewer needs to know is the base url.  I'm thinking
> that subdirectory displays could be irrelevant.
> Maybe I'm completely wrong here. I'm no expert in urls and navigation.

Generally speaking, and being generous with the paintbrush, when a
designer thinks that "all the user needs to know is ..." there will be
something wrong with the assumption.

> I would have thought that the user/viewer knows exactly where they are
> because they have typed in an easily recognisable base url and
> selected from a small menu list.

And then...  After clicking here and there, trying to see where they
are, trying to cope with a website that keeps loading the same page yet
shouldn't be, wanting to bookmark a page *within* the site, or go
directly to a page within the site without clicking through several
other pages in sequence...  The list goes on.

Frame based sites had the same "designed by bastards incorporated"
problem (a pseudo-company in a comedy show, for anything that was a pain
to use, and we've all experienced something like that, that we could
call it that).  All you ever saw, with framed sites, was www.example.com
in the address bar, no matter where you were in the site.

The navigation bar, or address gadget, or whatever you want to call it,
is an essential part of the browser.  Take that away, and it's like
taking away all the floor numbers outside the lifts in a multi-story
building, and claiming that the patron really doesn't need to know what
floor they're on.  That only holds true for two conditions:  Them
entering, visiting one floor, then exiting.  Them entering, visiting a
floor, and going back to the lobby between every floor that they visit.

It's a design error.

> I'm uncertain that urls actually matter to the viewer,

They do.

> I browse hundreds of sites/pages over a year and note that many become
> acutely complex, excessively large and don't fit in the display field.

That's a different design error.  But, despite that, they'll be unique
addresses per page.

Try making every page have the same address, and you start breaking the
ability of the browser to hit the back-page button, and go back to the
prior page (or pages, for multiple presses), then go (correctly) forward
again.

I'm trying to advise you not to paint yourself into a corner.

-- 
[tim at localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.