Consider this shortened URL: http://tr.im/Ikgq - What does it mean to you?
Don't take this the wrong way all those who routinely use this technique to drive people to their tweet reference or simply to download some cool software. I use try not to use URL shortening to get into my twitter snippets, but still I have my doubts when I do...
I have decided once and for all that a series of keywords is a muuuuch better way of helping people reference content. This can be seen in Human (+ Computer) friendly urls that end in word references '/home/my/content/', for example. But even if you are confronted with 'page.html?cat=1&page=2' - you will at least immediately have some idea of the source (assuming it is not a redirect in itself)... eg. The domain name, ie. 'http://webhaven.eu/webhaven_international_blog.html?...'
I thought about the issues that this URL shortening may pose to many people.
Here is a list of issues I came up with, perhaps clearly not complete - if you have more please help me out...
This was what occurred to me before I started my own search on the subject and discovered (naturally) I am not the only one who has deep concerns about the mis-use of URL shortening.
I'd like to at least reference a number of links that point to the issues I am talking about.
Arguably these two links are way better than a shortened URL, ie. http://bit.ly/DHEYsc
(Note: This link demonstrates a dead link.), simply because they specifically describe various content described in the webpage entries.
The second example goes as far as to tell me the month and year of the post, which is extremely helpful if I was say, looking for a fix to a software bug that exists now, not 3 years ago...
Our blog software has a combination of the two, it helps to stay just that little more obvious than a seemingly random reference number. In this way we are practicing a method of publishing content which has more emphasis on the importance of the content. It is likely a subjective argument, like which method is best, as to what you actually want to achieve in the user experience. Try copy pasting this full URL into your browser URL bar...
http://webhaveninternational.com/webhaven_international_blog?viewid=1780#Nokia 2730 Classic plugin for Apple iSync
Did you already guess where the link was taking you? Here we made a short link + a direct link (anchor) to the article, this anchor describes the content in more detail. It both provides simple direct links for Google, the text after # is removed cleanly, and for Human, a jump to the article and a pre-warning of what you are about to see.
Note that we also have the date archive available for those following us... You see 'December 2009' in the URL using ISO style formatting and you will expect to see all the blog posts for 12/2009. ie. http://webhaven.eu/webhaven_international_blog ?archive=2009-12
The best a URL shortener can do is seen on preview.tinyurl.com - you can use a Preview URL. That way a user goes to tinyurl, inspects the link, and can choose to proceed. Seems annoying to me, time is precious.
So what of my list? Why did I think of these 5 things?
1. Link Rot
If you make a tinyurl and then say, a blogger, drops their page or even their entire site? Or changes the reference on the page which happens a lot - what was it you linked to again? This is a Rotten Link. It is a way to frustrate users looking for specific content. This is going to be especially annoying if other people are referencing a site especially via Google.
I'd like to reference Eric Woodward who mentions the possibility: http://blog.tr.im/post/165049236/tr-im-to-be-community-owned ![]()
"But by so clearly favouring the URL shortener bit.ly, Twitter is able to control this flow of shared link data in a way it would not otherwise be able to. Currently, no one outside of the chosen few can access this data, and that is just not right.
I sincerely hope that Twitter and other aspiring social networks allow users to attach links to their status updates outside of any arbitrary character limitation, preventing the looming crisis of link-rot that bit.ly/twitter is potentially creating."
However he notes that this project exists: http://www.301works.org/ - so all is not lost :) But why start it? My guess, fashion... and basic practicalities in response to fashionable trends like very short messaging (vsm) on facebook, twitter, email.
Another good link to a similar article lamenting a potential disaster.
2. Reference Point Missing
Here is my big problem that just basically frustrates and could mis-lead to the point of fraud ie. Phishing
If a user of your posts can not easily verify the terminating domain (we assume your link is not a redirect), it causes a gap in information and therefore faulty knowledge + eventual mis-trust. I am starting to become suspicious of any shortened URL's simply because they equate to SPAM. Give me a good Domain Reference Point and I'll likely clickity click click, if it seems useful.
3. Mis-direction possible
Is it conceivable that bit.ly or tinyurl could be hacked... And is it conceivable that the Iranian Liberation Army could create a silly DNS attack and simply redirect ALL YOUR LINKS to a politically inflammable site?!! Be aware that you are giving away links and losing all control. Another point noted by out tr.im reference, Eric Woodward.
"Currently, no one outside of the chosen few can access this data, and that is just not right."
| June 2010 |
| May 2010 |
| March 2010 |
| December 2009 |
| November 2009 |
| October 2009 |
| September 2009 |
| August 2009 |
| July 2009 |
| June 2009 |