[X4U] How big is a DVD really? -> www-prefix

[Robert Ameeti]

At 6:06 PM +0100, 11/22/06, B. Kuestner wrote:

>>Yes, but its caught on in popular use as well as using "web" to 
>>replace "www" at the beginning of just about every URL in the 
>>world. Regardless of how much better (just think how much easier it 
>>is to say "web" than W-W-W), it just hasn't caught on.
>
>Worse than that, the www is actually not needed in the first place. 
>Go to http://apple.com or http://ibm.com. But people (and some 
>browsers) often believe that www is necessary for a valid URI.

As the owner of a domain, it is the responsibility to assign all 
servers host names (www, ftp, etc.)

The owner of a domain may choose to name their web server 'www' for 
consistency and ease of access by the average user. If they have 
another server that has no host name (the portion in front of the 
domain), then they may assign the 'no host' server to be directed to 
the web server which then allows users to not type www and still get 
to the web server, thus this is at the discretion of the domain owner.

.ie, This could be a setup for a domain

west.mydomain.com		64.1.2.3
east.mydomain.com		64.1.2.4
www.mydomain.com	64.1.2.5
domain.com	64.1.2.6
ftp.mydomain.com	64.1.2.7
mail.domain.com	64.1.2.7

In the above example, the same server is going to provide ftp and 
mail services. Users who expect that the web server can be accessed 
without typing in www will be confused as they will not be directed 
to the web server. This example shows that it is best to type www 
unless you have knowledge that you can get where you want to go 
without it. (The above example my be an administrator who also does 
not have a lot of concern for ease of use by the average person.)
-- 

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Robert Ameeti

A truly great book should be read in youth, again in maturity and once more in old age, as a fine building should be seen by morning light, at noon and by moonlight.
            -- Robertson Davies
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>