"www. is deprecated" Are You Fucking Kidding Me

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Aequitas

New member
Feb 19, 2007
2,954
73
0
Canada
Alright I'm just installing WPMU right now so I can start working on a new improved Splogpress (An insane one hopefully) because well I'm tired of the billion PMs asking about it so by popular demand I'll bring it back in full force but anyway this isn't about that shit.

While hooking up WPMU (Which by the way I'll be doing a post in the thread http://www.wickedfire.com/traffic-supreme/12690-complete-guide-wordpress-blogging.html because lets face it people will need help setting this shit up) anyway like a good little soldier I told WPMU that the domain should be www (dot) whatever (dot) com then after that a little message poped up trying to fucking tell me that www is now deprecated.

It had a link to a page (www. is deprecated.) now let me quote some shit here for you. (This is direct from the horses mouth).

No-www.org strives to make the Internet and communications about it as fruitful as possible. To that end, we make the modest proposal that website makers configure their main sites to be accessible by domain.com as well as www.domain.com.


Our ideal scene is one where non-specialized sites accept traffic on the www host name, but silently redirect it to the bare domain name. This is what no-www calls Class C. However, any site that takes in traffic one way or the other on both the www host and the bare domain are acceptable here.


We understand that this sort of configuration is not appropriate for every website. For example, a domain may require the webserver to be stored on a different machine than the domain root server. However, relatively few sites are built with this sort of architecture. A properly wielded DNS config can allegorically move mountains and make a setup like a Class B fairly simple even for the biggest of websites. In fact, several websites choose to forward traffic from domain.com to www.domain.com for branding reasons and that's just fine with us. As long as they don't simply block all HTTP traffic on the bare domain name, they're OK in our book.
Click to expand...
Oh boy before I go off on search engine optimization and duplicate content here let me see and let me tell you a bit more about class C and class B.

CLASS C

Class C is the most stringent compliance level. According to no-www, Example Web Page is an invalid subdomain. All traffic must go to example.net in order to view the site. Very few sites currently hold this classification, partially because many internet users are not yet savvy enough to drop the www every time. For that reason, this classification is not recommended for sites that serve the general public.
Click to expand...
Ok sure still waiting for some fucking common sense here.

CLASS B

Class B is currently the optimal no-www compliance level. This classification helps remind users that, while the www subdomain is accepted, it is not necessary. In Class B, Example Web Page is a valid address, but it redirects all traffic to example.net.
Click to expand...
haha ok now that the history lesson is over, basically how I interpeted it they are saying they want us to include both www. and non www. versions of the site but they obviously have no fucking clue that by doing so your giving yourself a duplicate content penalty and well to keep this short and sweet as a developer your causing yourself some shit in the long run by not re-directing to one or the other.

Now it seems to me like they are trying to say to us that the non www. is way better then the www. version which is bullshit because everyone (General public) still assume that the www. is required, they state this and say for sites for the general public you may want to use www. for branability, well no shit.

Ok I'm ending this rant because I actually need sleep instead of being agrivated by some people, I just don't understand how in the world they are trying to tell us that the www. is worse then the non www. version, its not like web savvy people instantly pay attention to not typing www. over the non www.

Man honestly I think this agrivates me the most because they don't at all try to give me a reasonable explanation behind there reasoning with this haha.

Anyone else want to comment cause I'm off to bed til morning.

EDIT: Oh shit I found an explanation here it is hahahahahahaha oh man I'm not going to be able to sleep after reading this.

In order to answer this question, we must first recall the definition of WWW:
[SIZE=-1]World Wide Web:
n. Abbr. WWW
1) The complete set of documents residing on all Internet servers that use the HTTP protocol, accessible to users via a simple point-and-click system.
2) n : a collection of internet sites that offer text and graphics and sound and animation resources through the hypertext transfer protocol. [/SIZE]​
By default, all popular Web browsers assume the HTTP protocol. In doing so, the software prepends the 'http://' onto the requested URL and automatically connect to the HTTP server on port 80. Why then do many servers require their websites to communicate through the www subdomain? Mail servers do not require you to send emails to recipient@mail.domain.com. Likewise, web servers should allow access to their pages though the main domain unless a particular subdomain is required.
Succinctly, use of the www subdomain is redundant and time consuming to communicate. The internet, media, and society are all better off without it.
Using the links at the top of the page, you may view recently validated domains as well as submit domains for real-time validation.
Click to expand...

So every single time the web slows down on you it has absolutely nothing to do with your internet connection, ethernet card (YES SPEED), ect... its because your looking at a domain which starts with www.
 


I think what they mean is, you should use 301 redirects.
Google is full off discussions about SEO and www or no-www, I personally agree that no-www is the way to go :) at least from the technical point of view
 
I make the server reply to both.

I have seen too many people typing in www. before every web adress religiously. They are used to it and being non-technical, Network classes and subdomains are over their head.

I also see too many webservers that will NOT reply to domain.com but to www.domain.com , which implies that all those people typing in www. before every domain name are right to do so in many cases.

::emp::
 
Yeah I don't know maybe I'm just too tired right now and have to come back to this in the morning but it seems like a bunch of bullshit hype to me, and not only that but from Wordpress of all places that support it.

Well not technically I think Wordpress supports Wordpress MU and WPMU supports the non www.

See ya all tomorrow afternoon I'm cooked.
 
Yeah, quite funny, I never saw an application making assumptions about your domains ..
But a 301 redirect (Permanent) from your www-domain to your non-www domain is said to be safe for spiders.
 
I think it's gay they don't allow you to choose with wordpress MU though. That's stupid..
 
my servers accept both but 90% of visitors use www
i usually forward all non-www to www anyway :D
 
Uh oh... machines with a mind of their own?? Does this mean our worst fears are going to be coming true sooner than we thought??? I mean.. he IS a Governor for California already.. what's next?! Ahhhhhhhhhhhh!!!

terminator21024x7685b15bd6.jpg
 
RuDeDoGg said:
I think it's gay they don't allow you to choose with wordpress MU though. That's stupid..
Click to expand...

Yeah I think it pissed me off the most that they didn't have the option for you so once my new MU plugin is done I'm saying fuck this shit and totally hacking MU to bring back this feature haha and some others of my own.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom