«

*Relative vs. Absolute URLs
URLs within HTML documents can take two forms, *absolute* (or full) an
*relative* (or partial).
An *absolute URL* is a full pathname which completely defines how t
reach a referenced file, regardless of where the file is reference
from. An example of an absolute URL is:
<A HREF=http://tinyurl.com/2zryc>Sample Page</A>
A *relative URL* gives only the amount of information necessary to fil
a referenced file relative to the location of the current file. A
example of a relative URL is:
<A HREF="sample.html">Sample Page</A> The difference between the two i
that the absolute URL above could be used to access the Sample pag
from anywhere in the world -- it gives complete access informatio
which will always work. The relative URL shown would only work i
called from another document already in th
*'www.yourwebsite.com/test/' (http://tinyurl.com/3ewud)* directory
--
FluxForum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FluxForums's Profile: http://www.fluxforums.com/member.php...etinfo&userid=
View this thread: http://www.fluxforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=15

"FluxForums" <> wrote in message
news: s.com...
> *Relative vs. Absolute URLs*
> URLs within HTML documents can take two forms, *absolute* (or full) and
> *relative* (or partial).
> An *absolute URL* is a full pathname which completely defines how to
> reach a referenced file, regardless of where the file is referenced
> from. An example of an absolute URL is:
> <A HREF=http://tinyurl.com/2zryc>Sample Page</A>
> A *relative URL* gives only the amount of information necessary to file
> a referenced file relative to the location of the current file. An
> example of a relative URL is:
> <A HREF="sample.html">Sample Page</A> The difference between the two is
> that the absolute URL above could be used to access the Sample page
> from anywhere in the world -- it gives complete access information
> which will always work. The relative URL shown would only work if
> called from another document already in the
> *'www.yourwebsite.com/test/' (http://tinyurl.com/3ewud)* directory.
> --
> FluxForums

http://whatever.com/?dothis

also a valid url, but not a page, or even a real location...

FluxForums <> wrote:

> *Relative vs. Absolute URLs*

Yes? Your message headers claim that you have sent a one-liner, but the
message contains some more lines. We don't see any question, or
anything that would clarify anything, just something that looks like a
half-baked attempt at explaining the difference. Without the poster's
name - always a useful bogosity warning.

Is FluxForum a new contestant in the competition of creating the most
useless, confusing, and misleading "discussion forum" that presents
Usenet as being part of it?

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> FluxForums <> wrote:
>
>
>>*Relative vs. Absolute URLs*
>
>
> Yes? Your message headers claim that you have sent a one-liner, but the
> message contains some more lines. We don't see any question, or
> anything that would clarify anything, just something that looks like a
> half-baked attempt at explaining the difference. Without the poster's
> name - always a useful bogosity warning.
>
> Is FluxForum a new contestant in the competition of creating the most
> useless, confusing, and misleading "discussion forum" that presents
> Usenet as being part of it?
>

Uhm actually headers say that she sent 27 lines (Below)

~Cameron

Path:
news.theplanet.net!diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed00 .sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!82-41-20-93.cable.ubr03.edin.blueyonder.co.UK!not-for-mail
From: "SpaceGirl" <>
Newsgroups: alt.html
Subject: Re: URLs
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:15:27 -0000
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <c19vjp$1fsanl$>
References: < m>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 82-41-20-93.cable.ubr03.edin.blueyonder.co.uk
(82.41.20.93)
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1077445050 50211573 I 82.41.20.93 ([129131])
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Xref: news.theplanet.net alt.html:381830

"Cameron" <> wrote in message
news:c1amv1$r4c$...
> Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> > FluxForums <> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>*Relative vs. Absolute URLs*
> >
> >
> > Yes? Your message headers claim that you have sent a one-liner, but the
> > message contains some more lines. We don't see any question, or
> > anything that would clarify anything, just something that looks like a
> > half-baked attempt at explaining the difference. Without the poster's
> > name - always a useful bogosity warning.
> >
> > Is FluxForum a new contestant in the competition of creating the most
> > useless, confusing, and misleading "discussion forum" that presents
> > Usenet as being part of it?
> >
>
> Uhm actually headers say that she sent 27 lines (Below)
>
> ~Cameron
>
> Path:
>
news.theplanet.net!diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed00 .sul.t-online.de!newsfeed0
1.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!82-41-20-93.cable.u
br03.edin.blueyonder.co.UK!not-for-mail
> From: "SpaceGirl" <>
> Newsgroups: alt.html
> Subject: Re: URLs
> Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:15:27 -0000
> Lines: 27
> Message-ID: <c19vjp$1fsanl$>
> References: < m>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 82-41-20-93.cable.ubr03.edin.blueyonder.co.uk
> (82.41.20.93)
> X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1077445050 50211573 I 82.41.20.93 ([129131])
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
> Xref: news.theplanet.net alt.html:381830


It's rude to expose a ladys headers without asking

Cameron wrote:

> Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>
>> FluxForums <> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> *Relative vs. Absolute URLs*
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes? Your message headers claim that you have sent a one-liner, but
>> the message contains some more lines. We don't see any question, or
>> anything that would clarify anything, just something that looks like a
>> half-baked attempt at explaining the difference. Without the poster's
>> name - always a useful bogosity warning.
>>
>> Is FluxForum a new contestant in the competition of creating the most
>> useless, confusing, and misleading "discussion forum" that presents
>> Usenet as being part of it?
>>
>
> Uhm actually headers say that she sent 27 lines (Below)
>
> ~Cameron
>
> Path:
> news.theplanet.net!diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed00 .sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!82-41-20-93.cable.ubr03.edin.blueyonder.co.UK!not-for-mail
>
> From: "SpaceGirl" <>
> Newsgroups: alt.html
> Subject: Re: URLs
> Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:15:27 -0000
> Lines: 27
> Message-ID: <c19vjp$1fsanl$>
> References: < m>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 82-41-20-93.cable.ubr03.edin.blueyonder.co.uk
> (82.41.20.93)
> X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1077445050 50211573 I 82.41.20.93 ([129131])
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
> Xref: news.theplanet.net alt.html:381830

That's SpaceGirl's header.
Jukka was responding to FluxForums... 1 line indeed.

--
Els

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

Els wrote:
>
>
> Cameron wrote:
>
>> Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>>
>>> FluxForums <> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> *Relative vs. Absolute URLs*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes? Your message headers claim that you have sent a one-liner, but
>>> the message contains some more lines. We don't see any question, or
>>> anything that would clarify anything, just something that looks like
>>> a half-baked attempt at explaining the difference. Without the
>>> poster's name - always a useful bogosity warning.
>>>
>>> Is FluxForum a new contestant in the competition of creating the most
>>> useless, confusing, and misleading "discussion forum" that presents
>>> Usenet as being part of it?
>>>
>>
>> Uhm actually headers say that she sent 27 lines (Below)
>>
>> ~Cameron
>>
>> Path:
>> news.theplanet.net!diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed00 .sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!82-41-20-93.cable.ubr03.edin.blueyonder.co.UK!not-for-mail
>>
>> From: "SpaceGirl" <>
>> Newsgroups: alt.html
>> Subject: Re: URLs
>> Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:15:27 -0000
>> Lines: 27
>> Message-ID: <c19vjp$1fsanl$>
>> References: < m>
>> NNTP-Posting-Host: 82-41-20-93.cable.ubr03.edin.blueyonder.co.uk
>> (82.41.20.93)
>> X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1077445050 50211573 I 82.41.20.93 ([129131])
>> X-Priority: 3
>> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
>> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
>> Xref: news.theplanet.net alt.html:381830
>
>
> That's SpaceGirl's header.
> Jukka was responding to FluxForums... 1 line indeed.
>

Euh, then either Mozilla Thunderbird messed up the thread or Jukka
replied to the wrong one.

~Cameron

SpaceGirl wrote:
> "Cameron" <> wrote in message
> news:c1amv1$r4c$...
>
>>Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>>
>>>FluxForums <> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>*Relative vs. Absolute URLs*
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes? Your message headers claim that you have sent a one-liner, but the
>>>message contains some more lines. We don't see any question, or
>>>anything that would clarify anything, just something that looks like a
>>>half-baked attempt at explaining the difference. Without the poster's
>>>name - always a useful bogosity warning.
>>>
>>>Is FluxForum a new contestant in the competition of creating the most
>>>useless, confusing, and misleading "discussion forum" that presents
>>>Usenet as being part of it?
>>>
>>
>>Uhm actually headers say that she sent 27 lines (Below)
>>
>>~Cameron
>>
>>Path:
>>
>
> news.theplanet.net!diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed00 .sul.t-online.de!newsfeed0
> 1.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!82-41-20-93.cable.u
> br03.edin.blueyonder.co.UK!not-for-mail
>
>>From: "SpaceGirl" <>
>>Newsgroups: alt.html
>>Subject: Re: URLs
>>Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:15:27 -0000
>>Lines: 27
>>Message-ID: <c19vjp$1fsanl$>
>>References: < m>
>>NNTP-Posting-Host: 82-41-20-93.cable.ubr03.edin.blueyonder.co.uk
>>(82.41.20.93)
>>X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1077445050 50211573 I 82.41.20.93 ([129131])
>>X-Priority: 3
>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
>>Xref: news.theplanet.net alt.html:381830
>
>
>
> It's rude to expose a ladys headers without asking
>
>
>
>
>

hey, at least I didn't go Henry The Eighth on them

~Cameron

Cameron wrote:

> Els wrote:
>
>> Cameron wrote:
>>
>>> Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>>>
>>>> FluxForums <> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> *Relative vs. Absolute URLs*
>>>>
>>>> Yes? Your message headers claim that you have sent a one-liner, but
>>>> the message contains some more lines. We don't see any question, or
>>>
>>> Uhm actually headers say that she sent 27 lines (Below)
>>>
>>> From: "SpaceGirl" <>

>>> Lines: 27
>>
>> That's SpaceGirl's header.
>> Jukka was responding to FluxForums... 1 line indeed.
>
> Euh, then either Mozilla Thunderbird messed up the thread or Jukka
> replied to the wrong one.

Must be the first, as you can see by his quote that Jukka
replied to Fluxforums, not SpaceGirl

--
Els

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

Els wrote:
> Cameron wrote:
>
>> Els wrote:
>>
>>> Cameron wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> FluxForums <> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> *Relative vs. Absolute URLs*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes? Your message headers claim that you have sent a one-liner, but
>>>>> the message contains some more lines. We don't see any question, or
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Uhm actually headers say that she sent 27 lines (Below)
>>>>
>>>> From: "SpaceGirl" <>
>
>
>>>> Lines: 27
>>>
>>>
>>> That's SpaceGirl's header.
>>> Jukka was responding to FluxForums... 1 line indeed.
>>
>>
>> Euh, then either Mozilla Thunderbird messed up the thread or Jukka
>> replied to the wrong one.
>
>
> Must be the first, as you can see by his quote that Jukka replied to
> Fluxforums, not SpaceGirl
>

Erk, well reluctant to blame my beloved Thunderbird I will blame
freeserve for expiring articles to quickly

~Cameron