469,306 Members | 1,916 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,306 developers. It's quick & easy.

favorites internet shortcut

Hi,

Just wanted to know if there is any provision in HTML through which a
particular url is forced to be added to the Favoriates/Bookmark folder
of the browser when a user bookmarks a page.

For example if the user is on the following url
www.abc.com/sub1/sub2/Details.htm

and tries to bookmark this page then instead of the above url the
following main url gets saved
www.abc.com/index.htm

I was wondering if one of the meta tags provide this feature.

TIA
Jul 23 '05 #1
31 2304
Aamir Ghanchi <aa**********@yahoo.com> wrote:
Just wanted to know if there is any provision in HTML through which a
particular url is forced to be added to the Favoriates/Bookmark folder
of the browser when a user bookmarks a page.
No, there isn't.
For example if the user is on the following url
www.abc.com/sub1/sub2/Details.htm

and tries to bookmark this page then instead of the above url the
following main url gets saved
www.abc.com/index.htm


When I find bookmarks that don't take me to the page that I bookmarked, I
just delete them. I usually don't bother trying to find the page that I
originally bookmarked.

See also http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20020303.html
--
Darin McGrew, mc****@stanfordalumni.org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, da***@htmlhelp.com, http://www.HTMLHelp.com/

"Experience is what allows you to recognize a mistake when you make it again."
Jul 23 '05 #2
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004, Aamir Ghanchi wrote:
Just wanted to know if there is any provision in HTML through which a
particular url is forced


Oh dear. You're new around here, evidently.

Jul 23 '05 #3
On 9 Sep 2004 14:17:35 -0700, Aamir Ghanchi <aa**********@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi,

Just wanted to know if there is any provision in HTML through which a
particular url is forced
Aaaaaaaaaa!!!
to be added to the Favoriates/Bookmark folder
of the browser when a user bookmarks a page.

For example if the user is on the following url
www.abc.com/sub1/sub2/Details.htm

and tries to bookmark this page then instead of the above url the
following main url gets saved
www.abc.com/index.htm
Oh, holy shit no. Why the hell would the user want a different page
bookmarked than he wants bookmarked? I'm sorry, I don't want to be rude,
but that's an incredibly stupid...
I was wondering if one of the meta tags provide this feature.


.... feature?!?
Jul 23 '05 #4
On 9 Sep 2004 14:17:35 -0700, aa**********@yahoo.com (Aamir Ghanchi)
wrote:
Just wanted to know if there is any provision in HTML
through which a particular url is forced to be added
to the Favoriates/Bookmark folder of the browser when
a user bookmarks a page.
No; HTML is a descriptive markup language based on nouns.
It does not "do" things as if it was a set of "verbs"...
For example if the user is on the following url
www.abc.com/sub1/sub2/Details.htm
and tries to bookmark this page then instead of the
above url the following main url gets saved
www.abc.com/index.htm
Oh my God; you would end up in my shunned site repository in no time if
you tried something like that on me.

In other words, you would lose a potential user directly, regardless of
whatever masterpiece of content that you may have available on your
pages.
I was wondering if one of the meta tags provide this feature.


Feature ?????

As I said; HTML (as publicly visible in "tags") does not DO things.
It's "back to school" for you Sir.

--
Rex
Jul 23 '05 #5
In article <ch*********@blue.rahul.net>,
Darin McGrew <mc****@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
See also http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20020303.html


Well, independent of the original topic of this post, I went to the URL
above, and was led to follow a side trail to

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010610.html

which talks about PDF files on web pages, and found the assertions on
this latter page to be not just opinionated, but _so_ incorrect, _so_
misinformed, _so_ dumb IMHO, that I wouldn't recommend that anyone go to
"useit.com" for anything.
Jul 23 '05 #6
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:08:37 -0700, AES/newspost <si*****@stanford.edu>
wrote:
In article <ch*********@blue.rahul.net>,
Darin McGrew <mc****@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
See also http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20020303.html


Well, independent of the original topic of this post, I went to the URL
above, and was led to follow a side trail to

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010610.html

which talks about PDF files on web pages, and found the assertions on
this latter page to be not just opinionated, but _so_ incorrect, _so_
misinformed, _so_ dumb IMHO, that I wouldn't recommend that anyone go to
"useit.com" for anything.


Hmm. Your post contains links to two articles over 2 years old. And I
cannot see any common ground between them.

As Ricky Ricardo says, you got some 'splainin' to do... because you're
trashing Jakob Nielsen's site, and he is often quite insightful from my
perspective, and that's based on reading more than 2 articles.
Jul 23 '05 #7
Aamir Ghanchi wrote:
Hi,

Just wanted to know if there is any provision in HTML through which a
particular url is forced to be added to the Favoriates/Bookmark folder
of the browser when a user bookmarks a page.

For example if the user is on the following url
www.abc.com/sub1/sub2/Details.htm

and tries to bookmark this page then instead of the above url the
following main url gets saved
www.abc.com/index.htm


See all the other answers for why you should not do this.

A possible solution, but PLEASE don't do it, would be to use a frameset.
That way, you can display the document in a frame, but the user will
bookmark the frameset.

Then, when they open the bookmark, they'll get really annoyed and never
come back.

--
Mark.
http://tranchant.plus.com/
Jul 23 '05 #8
Mark Tranchant <ma**@tranchant.plus.com> wrote:
A possible solution, but PLEASE don't do it


Then why mention it?

--
Spartanicus
Jul 23 '05 #9
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:08:37 -0700, AES/newspost <si*****@stanford.edu>
wrote:
In article <ch*********@blue.rahul.net>,
Darin McGrew <mc****@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
See also http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20020303.html


Well, independent of the original topic of this post, I went to the URL
above, and was led to follow a side trail to

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010610.html

which talks about PDF files on web pages, and found the assertions on
this latter page to be not just opinionated, but _so_ incorrect, _so_
misinformed, ...


Please tell us a few of the errors.

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/
Jul 23 '05 #10
Spartanicus <me@privacy.net> wrote in
news:t7********************************@news.spart anicus.utvinternet.ie:
Mark Tranchant <ma**@tranchant.plus.com> wrote:
A possible solution, but PLEASE don't do it


Then why mention it?


I suppose the philosophy is that the original poster is capable of deciding
for himself what solution to use.
Jul 23 '05 #11
Sam Hughes <hu****@rpi.edu> wrote:
A possible solution, but PLEASE don't do it


Then why mention it?


I suppose the philosophy is that the original poster is capable of deciding
for himself what solution to use.


Showing people how to shoot themselves through the foot and screwing
things up for users is not what we should aspire to imo.

--
Spartanicus
Jul 23 '05 #12
Els
Spartanicus wrote:
Sam Hughes <hu****@rpi.edu> wrote:
A possible solution, but PLEASE don't do it

Then why mention it?


I suppose the philosophy is that the original poster is
capable of deciding for himself what solution to use.


Showing people how to shoot themselves through the foot and
screwing things up for users is not what we should aspire
to imo.


I think it's essential that if you give someone a gun, you tell
them exactly how they should not shoot themselves in their foot.

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vo. O resto imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Rose Royce - Car Wash
Jul 23 '05 #13
In article <t7l2k0d18nhuqutm0cmsibcdrmr4qp3dm5
@news.spartanicus.utvinternet.ie>, me@privacy.net enlightened us with...
Mark Tranchant <ma**@tranchant.plus.com> wrote:
A possible solution, but PLEASE don't do it


Then why mention it?


Well...it's *possible* the OP is doing this for an intranet application and
it is a requirement from The Boss.

But it's probably just a newbie who doesn't know better.
You never know, though.

*back to lurking*

--
--
~kaeli~
Can you be a closet claustrophobic?
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace

Jul 23 '05 #14
Mark Tranchant wrote:
Aamir Ghanchi wrote:
Just wanted to know if there is any provision in HTML through which
a particular url is forced to be added to the Favoriates/Bookmark
folder of the browser when a user bookmarks a page.

For example if the user is on the following url
www.abc.com/sub1/sub2/Details.htm

and tries to bookmark this page then instead of the above url the
following main url gets saved
www.abc.com/index.htm


See all the other answers for why you should not do this.

A possible solution, but PLEASE don't do it, would be to use a
frameset. That way, you can display the document in a frame, but the
user will bookmark the frameset.


Even then, some browsers -- like IE -- will save more than just the
frameset (namely, information for the subframes as well). Anywhay, who
would use Frames in 2004? Not that they were better in '99, but at
least they might have been fashionable back then.

--
Google Blogoscoped
http://blog.outer-court.com
Jul 23 '05 #15
On 10 Sep 2004 11:21:07 GMT, Els <el*********@tiscali.nl> wrote:
Spartanicus wrote:
Sam Hughes <hu****@rpi.edu> wrote:
> A possible solution, but PLEASE don't do it

Then why mention it?

I suppose the philosophy is that the original poster is
capable of deciding for himself what solution to use.


Showing people how to shoot themselves through the foot and
screwing things up for users is not what we should aspire
to imo.


I think it's essential that if you give someone a gun, you tell
them exactly how they should not shoot themselves in their foot.


When I teach beginners the sax, I show them how to make it do all the
wrong things, then I show them what is proper technique. Then when they
do, say, make it honk they'll know it's because there's too much
mouthpiece in the mouth.

Sound pedagogy. Show common errors, when they make them they're more
likely to recognize them.
Jul 23 '05 #16
In article <op**************@news.individual.net>,
Neal <ne*****@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:08:37 -0700, AES/newspost <si*****@stanford.edu>
wrote:
In article <ch*********@blue.rahul.net>,
Darin McGrew <mc****@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
See also http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20020303.html


Well, independent of the original topic of this post, I went to the URL
above, and was led to follow a side trail to

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010610.html

which talks about PDF files on web pages, and found the assertions on
this latter page to be not just opinionated, but _so_ incorrect, _so_
misinformed, _so_ dumb IMHO, that I wouldn't recommend that anyone go to
"useit.com" for anything.


Hmm. Your post contains links to two articles over 2 years old. And I
cannot see any common ground between them.

As Ricky Ricardo says, you got some 'splainin' to do... because you're
trashing Jakob Nielsen's site, and he is often quite insightful from my
perspective, and that's based on reading more than 2 articles.

I went to the first link because it was cited in a discussion of a
certain topic on this group. Within that page I encountered the second
link as an incidental pointer to an entirely separate side issue, namely
the use of PDF files on web pages. Since I'm a heavy user of PDF files
on web pages myself (both uploading PDFs myself and downloading PDFs
from others), I followed the second link out of curiousity to see what
he had to say.

When I did so, I found his often very assertive statements,
generalizations and advice on that topic to be, IMHO, highly incorrect,
misleading, misinformed, whatever negative adjectives you want to use.
I know nothing about the rest of Nielsen's site or his opinions on other
subjects, and there was probably little real point or value to my
responding quite as strongly as I did above (or even responding at all).
Perhaps he is "quite insightful" on other issues -- but based on his
judgments on PDFs, I doubt I'd go back to his site to see.
Jul 23 '05 #17
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 08:51:21 -0700, AES/newspost <si*****@stanford.edu>
wrote:
I went to the first link because it was cited in a discussion of a
certain topic on this group. Within that page I encountered the second
link as an incidental pointer to an entirely separate side issue, namely
the use of PDF files on web pages. Since I'm a heavy user of PDF files
on web pages myself (both uploading PDFs myself and downloading PDFs
from others), I followed the second link out of curiousity to see what
he had to say.
Fair enough.
When I did so, I found his often very assertive statements,
generalizations and advice on that topic to be, IMHO, highly incorrect,
misleading, misinformed, whatever negative adjectives you want to use.
Why? Details?
I know nothing about the rest of Nielsen's site or his opinions on other
subjects, and there was probably little real point or value to my
responding quite as strongly as I did above (or even responding at all).
Perhaps he is "quite insightful" on other issues -- but based on his
judgments on PDFs, I doubt I'd go back to his site to see.


The PDF article is 3 years old (aside from an addition at the end which is
a year old). I think PDFs are better now than then. His opinions seem
reasonable for their time.

Nielsen is controversial, but his articles are always worth a read because
he makes you think. Can't say I always agree with him, but don't shut him
out based on 2 of his many, many articles. The point is not to read only
what you agree with - how do you grow that way?
Jul 23 '05 #18
Neal ne*****@yahoo.com wrote:
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 08:51:21 -0700, AES/newspost <si*****@stanford.edu>
wrote:
I went to the first link because it was cited in a discussion of a
certain topic on this group. Within that page I encountered the second
link as an incidental pointer to an entirely separate side issue, namely
the use of PDF files on web pages. Since I'm a heavy user of PDF files
on web pages myself (both uploading PDFs myself and downloading PDFs
from others), I followed the second link out of curiousity to see what
he had to say.


Fair enough.
When I did so, I found his often very assertive statements,
generalizations and advice on that topic to be, IMHO, highly incorrect,
misleading, misinformed, whatever negative adjectives you want to use.


Why? Details?


Beacuse if you give details of what you know that Nielsen gets wrong then
we ALL learn. Otherwise it's all just willy waving and I'll stick with the
advice of people who explain why they think things should be done a
certain way.

It's no use having somebody simply assert that a particular person is too
assertive and prone to generalisations unless they explain some of their
differences in opinion so that the rest of us can see which idea is right.

--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
Jul 23 '05 #19
Jan Roland Eriksson <jr****@newsguy.com> wrote in message
It's "back to school" for you Sir.


The original question I posted is for an internal web-application used
by our staff only. They get to the first page (the actual page that
needs to be bookmarked) by typing in the link in the address-bar or by
clicking on the url someplace. But as soon as this page loads the
Windows domain login box pops-up asking them to enter username and
password. At this point they cannot bookmark this page since the
browsers menu/buttons for this purpose are disabled (while the popup
window is on). As soon as they enter the credentials the page is
resubmitted to a new action page where the rest of the processing is
done. finally when the browser buttons/menu for bookmark is available
it is no longer the original page that needed to be bookmarked. This
was the rational behind what I asked.
Jul 23 '05 #20
On 10 Sep 2004 10:18:53 -0700, Aamir Ghanchi <aa**********@yahoo.com>
wrote:
The original question I posted is for an internal web-application used
by our staff only.


This ng is in the www hierarchy, so that is off-topic, sorry. Try a ng
devoted to intranet, or alt.html.
Jul 23 '05 #21
>
and tries to bookmark this page then instead of the above url the
following main url gets saved
www.abc.com/index.htm

Yes it can easily be accomplished. I'm not sure why everyone is

giving you such a hard time on this when the answer is so simple.
After bookmarking, right click the bookmark and under properties
change the url to the preferred bookmark. WA LA!

Just be sure to include the instructions on your page so those users
that also want to 'correct' the bookmark properties can also enjoy the
benefits fo doing so. I would use a flashing and scrolling marquee
and some alert boxes everytime the page was loaded so that everyone
was sure to see it.
Jul 23 '05 #22
bg***@yahoo.com (Nairb) wrote in news:3340f31f.0409101022.503d249
@posting.google.com:

and tries to bookmark this page then instead of the above url the
following main url gets saved
www.abc.com/index.htm

Yes it can easily be accomplished. I'm not sure why everyone is

giving you such a hard time on this when the answer is so simple.
After bookmarking, right click the bookmark and under properties
change the url to the preferred bookmark. WA LA!

Just be sure to include the instructions on your page so those users
that also want to 'correct' the bookmark properties can also enjoy the
benefits fo doing so. I would use a flashing and scrolling marquee
and some alert boxes everytime the page was loaded so that everyone
was sure to see it.


What, are you an idiot? The only way you can get it to work reliably is to
do it in Flash!

;-)
Jul 23 '05 #23
In article
<aq********************************@news.spartanic us.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <me@privacy.net> wrote:
I suppose the philosophy is that the original poster is capable of deciding
for himself what solution to use.


Showing people how to shoot themselves through the foot and screwing
things up for users is not what we should aspire to imo.


One who knows right from wrong is smarter than one who only knows right.
Just look at all the regulars in here.

--
Kris
<kr*******@xs4all.netherlands> (nl)
Jul 23 '05 #24
In article <si***************************@news.stanford.edu >,
AES/newspost <si*****@stanford.edu> wrote:
See also http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20020303.html


Well, independent of the original topic of this post, I went to the URL
above, and was led to follow a side trail to

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010610.html


Not here. Are you sure you didn't accidentally click a link?

--
Kris
<kr*******@xs4all.netherlands> (nl)
Jul 23 '05 #25
Kris <kr*******@xs4all.netherlands> wrote:
>I suppose the philosophy is that the original poster is capable of deciding
>for himself what solution to use.


Showing people how to shoot themselves through the foot and screwing
things up for users is not what we should aspire to imo.


One who knows right from wrong is smarter than one who only knows right.
Just look at all the regulars in here.


I've no idea what you are on about.

I think we agree that we want to make the OP smarter, why you think that
giving the OP an axe will do this is beyond me. Shirley it would suffice
to tell the OP that chopping off a limb of his customers is not smart.

--
Spartanicus
Jul 23 '05 #26
In article
<ut********************************@news.spartanic us.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>I suppose the philosophy is that the original poster is capable of
>deciding
>for himself what solution to use.

Showing people how to shoot themselves through the foot and screwing
things up for users is not what we should aspire to imo.


One who knows right from wrong is smarter than one who only knows right.
Just look at all the regulars in here.


I've no idea what you are on about.

I think we agree that we want to make the OP smarter, why you think that
giving the OP an axe will do this is beyond me. Shirley it would suffice
to tell the OP that chopping off a limb of his customers is not smart.


The OP knows that that is not smart. However, the relationship between
his perceived solutions and a disastrous result is unclear to him unless
one explains _how_ it works/doesn't work.

Many in here know what they know because they have been doing the Wrong
Thing themselves once and saw it fail. Those coming behind have the
luxury of not having to go through that experience, but instead benefit
from the experience of the ones before them.

I think telling them what (not) to do isn't half as convincing as
explaining them what (not) to do. We're talking about people who have
been copying 'tricks' of their teachers, their peers, authors of
websites they look up to. We should not teach 'anti-tricks' in a form of
dogmatic "do this" and "don't do that". We should be cultivating insight
into the mechanics behind the technology, the reasoning of those who
created it and the minds of their visitors.

--
Kris
<kr*******@xs4all.netherlands> (nl)
Jul 23 '05 #27
Kris <kr*******@xs4all.netherlands> wrote:
>One who knows right from wrong is smarter than one who only knows right.
>Just look at all the regulars in here.
I've no idea what you are on about.

I think we agree that we want to make the OP smarter, why you think that
giving the OP an axe will do this is beyond me. Shirley it would suffice
to tell the OP that chopping off a limb of his customers is not smart.


The OP knows that that is not smart.


And you conclude this from what?
However, the relationship between
his perceived solutions and a disastrous result is unclear to him unless
one explains _how_ it works/doesn't work.
He didn't perceive any solutions, the request itself clearly showed that
he has no understanding of what is right and what is wrong.
Many in here know what they know because they have been doing the Wrong
Thing themselves once and saw it fail.


I'd belong to that category, but it's irrelevant to this thread. The
wish itself is the problem here.

--
Spartanicus
Jul 23 '05 #28
In article
<kp********************************@news.spartanic us.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>One who knows right from wrong is smarter than one who only knows right.
>Just look at all the regulars in here.

I've no idea what you are on about.

I think we agree that we want to make the OP smarter, why you think that
giving the OP an axe will do this is beyond me. Shirley it would suffice
to tell the OP that chopping off a limb of his customers is not smart.


The OP knows that that is not smart.


And you conclude this from what?


Come on. Everybody knows it is not good to shoot oneself in the foot,
cut an arm off or annoy a visitor. Nobody wants to either. That one is
doing exactly this by some methods is unclear to many that come here.
However, the relationship between
his perceived solutions and a disastrous result is unclear to him unless
one explains _how_ it works/doesn't work.


He didn't perceive any solutions, the request itself clearly showed that
he has no understanding of what is right and what is wrong.


Make him understand. Talling him "not to do this" possibly makes you
right, but he still doesn't understand why his way is wrong.
Many in here know what they know because they have been doing the Wrong
Thing themselves once and saw it fail.


I'd belong to that category, but it's irrelevant to this thread. The
wish itself is the problem here.


Explain to him why that is so and you will have done your good deed for
today.

--
Kris
<kr*******@xs4all.netherlands> (nl)
Jul 23 '05 #29
Kris <kr*******@xs4all.netherlands> wrote:
Make him understand. Talling him "not to do this" possibly makes you
right, but he still doesn't understand why his way is wrong.


What *are* you on about? The OP was told not to do this and why in the
first reply to his query (by Darin McGrew).

Then someone added : and here's how to do it.That won't teach the OP
anything beneficial.

--
Spartanicus
Jul 23 '05 #30
In article
<3b********************************@news.spartanic us.utvinternet.ie>,
Spartanicus <me@privacy.net> wrote:
Make him understand. Talling him "not to do this" possibly makes you
right, but he still doesn't understand why his way is wrong.
What *are* you on about?


Nothing harmful, that's for sure. If there is a side to speak of in the
first place, I am on the same side with you.
The OP was told not to do this and why in the
first reply to his query (by Darin McGrew).

Then someone added : and here's how to do it.That won't teach the OP
anything beneficial.


And it was you who asked why one should bother to tell the OP _how_ not
to do it. Maybe Darin was mistaken by promoting a harmful way, but what
matters to me is that Darin's explanation may have made the matter
insightful to the OP, while a simple "don't do it" does not.

--
Kris
<kr*******@xs4all.netherlands> (nl)
Jul 23 '05 #31
Kris <kr*******@xs4all.netherlands> wrote:
>Make him understand. Talling him "not to do this" possibly makes you
>right, but he still doesn't understand why his way is wrong.
What *are* you on about?


Nothing harmful, that's for sure. If there is a side to speak of in the
first place, I am on the same side with you.


I don't think I want to have you on my side ;-)
The OP was told not to do this and why in the
first reply to his query (by Darin McGrew).

Then someone added : and here's how to do it.That won't teach the OP
anything beneficial.


And it was you who asked why one should bother to tell the OP _how_ not
to do it. Maybe Darin was mistaken by promoting a harmful way


What was wrong with Darin's answer?
, but what
matters to me is that Darin's explanation may have made the matter
insightful to the OP, while a simple "don't do it" does not.


I see no such posts.

--
Spartanicus
Jul 23 '05 #32

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

3 posts views Thread by Dan Tripp | last post: by
1 post views Thread by Jordan | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by ljlevend2 | last post: by
1 post views Thread by =?Utf-8?B?TWFya3VzIFNjaC4=?= | last post: by
reply views Thread by zhoujie | last post: by
reply views Thread by suresh191 | last post: by
reply views Thread by harlem98 | last post: by
reply views Thread by harlem98 | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.