Someone is simply wrong.
It sounds like someone with not enough knowledge is trying to describe something they don't know they don't understand.
Iincluding a hostname in a URL to the same site is simply semantically unnecessary which is why people say not to do it. It is possible that it changes the order some browsers fetch resources, but I've never heard of that elsewhere, so it's likely to be an abberation on some specific older versions. Wade. Static Scribblings http://staticsan.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
That's what I suspected
Like Scott said, it helps with maintenance, but I've never heard of a performance hit.
--
Drew |
I don't understand what this is saying about links
- (drook)
- (9)
- Dec. 26, 2011, 07:52:01 PM EST
"For best performance, don't hit remote sites." Perhaps?
-NT
- (Another Scott)
- (2)
- Dec. 26, 2011, 08:10:40 PM EST
"When linking to local resources"
- (drook)
- (1)
- Dec. 26, 2011, 08:18:30 PM EST
No doubt it's worded very poorly.
- (Another Scott)
- Dec. 26, 2011, 08:27:40 PM EST
Have to test it...
- (malraux)
- (1)
- Dec. 26, 2011, 08:30:48 PM EST
I'd go with ^^^HIS EXPLANATION
-NT
- (folkert)
- Dec. 26, 2011, 10:12:07 PM EST
Someone is simply wrong.
- (static)
- (1)
- Dec. 26, 2011, 09:06:47 PM EST
That's what I suspected
- (drook)
- Dec. 26, 2011, 09:42:04 PM EST
I can see only one obscure case where that is true
- (jay)
- (1)
- Dec. 27, 2011, 10:29:27 AM EST
Okay, that makes sense
- (drook)
- Dec. 27, 2011, 10:35:04 AM EST
