On Mar 6, 2010, at 10:37 AM, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
2010/3/6 Jon Cruz <jon@...18...>:
A radio button would be better for the choice between an absolute and relative link.
EEEEK!!!
Absolute links are quite troublesome, and were one of the worst things from our Sodipodi legacy. We'll need to seriously think before allowing them in.
I think absolute links should be allowed, but relative links be the default. Absolute links are useful when you have a large shared image that you need to reuse in several files in different folders, like a company logo.
(smart phone wasn't too smart with webmail. Trying to reconstruct what I attempted earlier)
Exactly. You've hit right on the main first use case we have to address. That's probably a main area we need to think of.
For these situations, contents on a web page should not include the "http://..." part in their links. Relative links would often be good too, but sometimes absolute will work out better in practice. So, given that the links shouldn't have "http:://..." in them and that it is almost impossible to replicate such absolute locations on a designer's local computer anyway, simply allowing absolute links won't solve things.
However... even if one were to have full URLs in the links, there would be a good chance that the final target assets might not even be at the final location. It would be quite common for a designer to work with things in some staging area before they get pushed to live locations.
There are other issues too. I'll try to rough out a summary in a bit.
So the main thing here is probably that you've identified the first problem area we have to be sure to cover. That's good and we should make sure we follow up on this point.