[LINK] E-mail question

[Lea de Groot]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:54:49 +1000, Ivan Trundle wrote:
> It looks to me as though there is no standard, and the use of angle 
> brackets isn't of any real help to those who are unable to read 
> longer URLs.

I have found it useful in the past, but you must judge by *your* market
 
> Although it has been suggested that we use TinyURL or similar to send 
> out this kind of information, I regard using a third-party website to 
> direct people to our website as a highly unprofessional.

I tend to like to list both - I tend to link to the full URL and then 
note in brackets (if that breaks, try this: http...)
 
> I think that the 80:20 rule might well have to apply. And we will 
> continue to try to help those who at least are kind enough to tell us 
> that the URL doesn't work (mostly, they don't have a clue that the 
> last few characters have dropped off, and are mostly not greatly 
> interested in pursuing the problem, or even the right URL - hence my 
> desire to find a solution.
> 
> Of course, I could ask our programmers to change their thinking, and 
> invent shorter URLs, but I've got more chance of changing the way the 
> rest of the world operates than changing our programmers.

Yes, ideally you would only offer links to your site to get people onto 
your site. I usually use tinyurl et al for third party links that I 
don't control.
I would suggest you ask your programmers for an *alternate* url that 
once clicked on changes to the correct url in the browser. (For the 
technically inclined, it should send a 301 header)
Its not terribly difficult for most webservers, so should be doable for 
your programmers. Really :)

HIH!
Lea
-- 
Lea de Groot
Brisbane