Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Attach vs. URL

  1. #1
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Yilgarn region of Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    5,453
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Attach vs. URL

    What are the relative merits of these methods? What would make me consider Attaching a file to a post rather than u/l the file to my web site and offering a URL?

    URL: If a bug is detected, I retain control over the web site. I can delete or update the file at my discretion.

    ATTACH: Woody pays for storage; I'm less likely to blow my ISP's 5Meg limit for a web site.

    URL: I can direct others than Woody's Boodies to the web site; the Attach is visible only to youse guys.

    ATTACH: I have to make the file available at time of posting; I don't fall into the trap of promising a file (in a post) and then being unable to u/l it to my web site, or forgetting to u/l it to my web site.

    others?

  2. #2
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    2,970
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 29 Times in 27 Posts

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    Maybe a rule of thumb would be:

    Attach for the quick one-off solutions or samples, URL for bigger or ongoing projects that you're likely to be continuing to revise/update?

  3. #3
    Silver Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,734
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    Revisions and updates can also be handled very nicely using Attachments here. On the edit screen simply choose "Replace Attachment" and upload your revised/updated copy.
    <IMG SRC=http://www.wopr.com/w3tuserpics/Eileen_sig.gif>

  4. #4
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Yilgarn region of Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    5,453
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    What happens if I u/l a second copy of, say, Sample.dot and don't replace it? Does the board identify a unique copy for each, or will the second (newer) copy overwrite the first?

  5. #5
    Plutonium Lounger Leif's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    14,010
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    I think there may be confusion if you edit a previous post and replace the attachment.
    I would be happier if you edited the previous and just delete the attachment (i.e. u/l nothing) and refer to a new post with the revised attachment.
    Then everyone will know exactly where they're at.

  6. #6
    Silver Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Northern, California, USA
    Posts
    1,886
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    I've noticed while attaching GIFs in Pix Place that if you re-post over a previous attachment with an attachment of the same filename, you must refresh before the new file will be visibile... for what that's worth..

    Oh, and Eileen DID state that she believed Scream was looking into multiple attachments..(bliss!) right? [img]/w3timages/icons/smile.gif[/img]

    Drk.
    <IMG SRC=http://www.wopr.com/w3tuserpics/Kel_sig.gif>
    Moderator:<font color=448800> Pix Place, Internet Explorer</font color=448800>
    <small>www.kvisions.com

  7. #7
    Silver Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,734
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    It isn't actually the *same* filename - each one gets a new number code prepended.
    <IMG SRC=http://www.wopr.com/w3tuserpics/Eileen_sig.gif>

  8. #8
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Yilgarn region of Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    5,453
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    Ah! So every u/l file attachment has a unique refernce number in "the system"?

  9. #9
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Yilgarn region of Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    5,453
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    Another thought: I bet the SEARCH mechanism doesn't search attached files. Nor URLs, of course.

    Attaching a chunk of VBA code as a TXT file and then searching the lounge for a key word or phrase should miss that function code.

  10. #10
    Silver Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,734
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    If you describe what the Attachment is for, in the message, then you can find the message containing it.
    <IMG SRC=http://www.wopr.com/w3tuserpics/Eileen_sig.gif>

  11. #11
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Yilgarn region of Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    5,453
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    Yabbut.

    Consider a VBA procedure pasted as a text attachment. Now think of someone musing "Who knows anything about 'VBComponentsv". The original poster could not have known that someone would need to know, and 'VBComponents' is but one word in perhaps six hundred in the text. There's no way a poster can post each word that might be interesting as part of the subject.

    I still believe that the greatest value of a place like Woody's Lounge is NOT the people on it but the vast resource of stored material. (To deny this would be to deny Shakespeare and every other person who has ever committed thoghts to paper for future generations).

    Being able to SEARCH the repository is the greatest value on two major counts:

    1) It allows a newcomer to any topic to get up to speed quickly

    2) It reduces the load on current members by diverting some of the FAQ away.

    That's assuming, of course, that people use the SEARCH function.


    Please don't ANYBODY get me wrong - the people here are great. I wouldn't be here otherwise. But a contributed post increases in value each time it is read. And it ought to get to be read more often by a search mechanism. Anything that enhances the search mechanism increases the value of a post, and THAT rewards the currently active members.

  12. #12
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Sacramento, California, USA
    Posts
    16,775
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    Nobody has mentioned the fact that there are still people out there who don't <big>have</big> their own website to reference. For those, attachments are the only reasonable option.

    I do think that newcomers will get up to speed more quickly if they don't have to search through extremely detailed posts. That's where attachments allow readers to skim the topic and only delve into the details when they're ready.
    Charlotte

  13. #13
    Silver Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,734
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post

    Re: Attach vs. URL

    ...at which point I'll drop in a timely reminder to all our Loungers:
    Do not go blethering on ad infinitum.
    Keep it short, sweet and to the point! [img]/S/dragon.gif[/img]
    <IMG SRC=http://www.wopr.com/w3tuserpics/Eileen_sig.gif>

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •