 |
 |
IMHO I agree .... Just for ease of use for the people that will open these sites up in their browsers, I would have to say url rewriting of domainname.org to www.domainname.org and for the webserver to respond to both. It just makes it easier for the people who use the site. We never know what they're going to type in or expect or bookmark .... so why not make it easy to use as we can. Lee Duynslager LD > From: Vivek Joshi <[log in to unmask]> > Reply-To: Vivek Joshi <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:47:28 -0400 > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] www. required on URLs? > > There are some SEO disadvantages to having people go to both www. and > non-www. sites since google etc sees them as separate sites, however this > can be resolved on the server side by Url redirection/rewriting rules. So > the best practice should be to have both working via DNS and have > appropriate rules on the web server to make one of them primary. > -Vivek > > > On 7/12/10 10:20 AM, "Brian Hoort" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> I remember a time in the early nineties when "www." was practically required >> on all URLs. E.g. http://www.msu.edu, not http://msu.edu. These days >> sites almost universally work with or without it. I notice that the MSU >> home page works both ways, as does my college and department sites, and all >> corporate sites I can think of. Interestingly the MSU Library still >> requires this. http://lib.msu.edu does not work. >> >> In general, what is the feeling out there on this? From a usability >> standpoint, do you think this is just webmaster preference, or is this >> considered "broken" these days? >> >> Brian Hoort >> Computer Service >> Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics >> Michigan State University >> 517-355-4701 >> Email: [log in to unmask] >> Skype: brian_hoort >> >