Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 14, 2024. It is now read-only.

Draft: web.dev/url [DO NOT PUBLISH BEFORE TECHNICAL REVIEW] #9613

Closed
wants to merge 33 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

samdutton
Copy link
Member

An article explaining the names of URL parts.

@heyawhite — as discussed, I've requested you as a reviewer, but feel free to pass this on.

Once this has had tech writer review, I'll get a technical review done.

[DO NOT PUBLISH BEFORE TECHNICAL REVIEW]

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Feb 17, 2023

Deploy Preview for web-dev-staging ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 8f9a654
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/web-dev-staging/deploys/65203fa3e9a51a0008cc0ac2
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-9613--web-dev-staging.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

Copy link
Contributor

@alexandrascript alexandrascript left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some small comments, mostly take it or leave it. Otherwise lgtm!

src/site/content/en/blog/url/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/site/content/en/blog/url/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 57 to 60
### Anchor {: #anchor}

See
[hash](#hash).
Copy link
Contributor

@alexandrascript alexandrascript Feb 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I suggest scrapping this, and instead labeling the below glossary item "Hash or anchor." Since this is a casual glossary (listing items in an article rather than the capital-G Glossary), they don't need to be separated.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good idea — thanks.

src/site/content/en/blog/url/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 183 to 186
### Query string

See [search](#search).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Consider doing the same as suggested for anchor / hash.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Likewise — I've done as you suggested.

src/site/content/en/blog/url/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/site/content/en/blog/url/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/site/content/en/blog/url/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/site/content/en/blog/url/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link

@mikewest mikewest left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I started leaving comments, but now I feel like I might not understand the purpose of this article.

{% Aside %}
The named parts of a URL may coincide, but that doesn't mean they're equivalent!

The [FQDN](#fqdn), [eTLD+1](#etld1), [hostname](#hostname) and [registrable domain](#registrable-domain)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure it's terribly useful to introduce "fully-qualified domain name" as the first concept you point to here. It doesn't appear in the URL spec, and I'm fairly sure it's equivalent to host in URL's parlance? AFAIK, the distinction would only come up in the context of DNS, where computername and computername.corp.internal.network might resolve to the same address. That complexity doesn't seem worth raising here (except possibly in a note suggesting that host and fqdn are the same on the open web, and only might differ on local networks).

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Likewise, I think it's best for us to merge "eTLD+1" and "registrable domain" into the latter, following URL. Again, it might be reasonable to note that lots of people will call it "eTLD+1", but we should encourage alignment on one term.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks Mike (belatedly!) I've actually removed this bit — I think the aside was more confusing than useful anyway.

The named parts of a URL may coincide, but that doesn't mean they're equivalent!

The [FQDN](#fqdn), [eTLD+1](#etld1), [hostname](#hostname) and [registrable domain](#registrable-domain)
may be the same for some URLs, but each term has a different meaning.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As above, I don't think each term does have a different meaning. :)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You're right — now removed (as per previous comment).

may be the same for some URLs, but each term has a different meaning.
{% endAside %}

Edit the URL in the Glitch below to see the part names. (You can also open this in a separate tab at [url-parts.glitch.me](https://url-parts.glitch.me).)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As above, I'd like to see this Glitch align with URL and use "registrable domain".

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've updated the Glitch to use "registrable domain" (with eTLD+1 in brackets, in case people see that term).

@devnook
Copy link
Contributor

devnook commented Feb 27, 2023

@samdutton - The Widget is updated and the code for your demo is provisionally checked in under https://github.com/GoogleChrome/web.dev/tree/main/src/site/content/en/demos/url-parts and https://github.com/GoogleChrome/web.dev/tree/main/src/site/content/en/third_party. Feel free to edit demo files and include the widget with {% Widget 'demos/url-parts' %} if you find it suitable.

@samdutton
Copy link
Member Author

samdutton commented Feb 27, 2023 via email

@samdutton
Copy link
Member Author

@devnook On hold, pending resolution of technical concerns — after I'm back on 29 March.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jun 17, 2023

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. To prevent this from happening, leave a comment.

@stale stale bot added the stale label Jun 17, 2023
@stale stale bot removed the stale label Oct 5, 2023
@rachelandrew
Copy link
Collaborator

Closing as the site is now migrated.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants