Gordon Woolf's Blog

Coping with long URLs

URLs are one the most difficult things to cope with in written material, whether that is text in printed form or on the Web.

One way to solve this in layout programs such as InDesign is to specify the URL as having "no language" (you can even set up a character style to specify "no language" as the language). InDesign will then only break the line when it has to and will not insert a hyphen.

But in most such programs, the way to deal with URLs has improved in the last couple of versions. The biggest problem is that if the URL is broken in a word which is in the program's hyphenation dictionary it will make it impossible to just select the web address and either click on it or copy it into a browser winodw. To a computer, the hyphen turns iot into aan entirely different address.

It is also common to use a "discretionary line break" linked with a character style to put the DLB after the @ sign or before the dot of .com

Some time ago (CS3?) InDesign's internal rules for line breaks changed to include the slash(/), back-slash(\), underscore(_), ellipse(...), commercial-at(@), any dash (en-dash, em-dash, etc). They also added some algorithms that allow breaks at periods within URLs but not abbreviations... that was definitely getting better at the time I stopped keeping track and is by no means easy to achieve.

There may now be even better ways to solve the problem and I would be surprised if it cannot also be done in the latest QuarkXPress.

My main point is that there are now ways to ensure that a web address is not broken by adding a hyphen and proofreaders should feel confident in marking bad URL breaks and perhaps even suggest some of the possible solutions. In checking proofs it is also worth ensuring that if an address does include a hyphen, it is one that is meant to be there and not one which may have been added because of a line break that no longer applies.

On web sites those responsible should also ask why they are using long URLs in a visible form, though I have to admit I have been guilty, as it does ensure that if web text is copied for use in other media that the URL is copied, and not just the text of a link. Where that is not likely, just embed the full address in the HTML code as an href attribute.

For MS Word the advice is to enter the URL in both the address and text-to-display boxes of the edit hyperlink dialog. You can then add a space within the text of the URL without upsetting the link, or better still, use the zero-width space character or a no-width optional break after a character in the URL such as a forward slash. This character has no shortcut key but you can allocate one in the insert special characters dialog if you need them often.

If you have a better way, let me know.

Sending large files

Files are getting larger - especially photo files, and other graphic files such as those created in page layout programs. And the result is that we are starting to hit the limits of what can conveniently be sent as email attachments.

There is a need for "a better way" regardless of whether the file you wish to send is a few pictures of your kids for Aunt Daisy or the leaflet that you want printed ready for the launch of your new product.

However, we should still be asking the obvious questions:
Why is it a large file?
Can it be made smaller?

In many cases that picture from your latest 10 megapixel digital camera is far more detailed than Aunt Daisy will ever want to see, even if shown on the plasma TV in her lounge room. And much more detailed than can be seen on the more likely 15-inch monitor of her five-year-old Dell.

You may be surprised just how much JPEG compression you can create before you see any of those "artifacts" the photo gurus keep warning about.

You can even try the old fashioned solution - simply Zip the file, or create a zipped folder of it in Windows XP or 7, which is just about the same process but a little easier.

Even so, you may still reach the limits of email.

Few email servers will accept attachments larger than 10MB. Some are limited to 1MB or less. But it is not just that you may not be able to send a huge file -- larger files are more likely to be delayed.

They can take longer than snail mail. Let me give an example. A graphic designer had a piece of artwork we needed for a book cover. I tried to explain the workings of FTP but he insisted he had sent many files of this size, around 2MB, by email and not had a problem.

Always be wary of that kind of statement: I've done that loads of times; never had a problem!

And so I waited. A CD of some replacement pictures for inside the book sent from an adjacent suburb by express mail arrived early next morning.

And I waited.

We resorted to courier.

Three days later, the email appeared in my inbox. Yes, it had been sent, but the 2MB graphic file which was actually nearly 3MB as an attachment, showed that it had sat around in the servers of a certain major service provider for many, many hours.

If I impart human thought to those machines on the way, I can imagine the arguments: can I send this now? No, I'm busy with the littlies, wait till I have more time. Can I send it now? No, I've got to do my nightly backup. Can I send it now? No, I've got a headache.

So, how do you get these larger files on the move?

One answer is to put them on a web site.

Does your ISP offer a web site? Many do. And if you want to do it with aplomb, how about getting a $10 a year domain from GoDaddy.com and a free web site from one of the places you'll find if you type "free web sites" into a search engine? In this way you can put your pics to auntie at yoursonfred.com (which is available as I write!)

To put the files on the website, your host may offer a means of using your browser, but it is more likely they'll tell you to use FTP (I said we would get back to that).

Storage sites are sites intended for remote storage of files, principally for backup but they can also be used for transferring file. Type "free online storage" in to your search engine for a list of many such sites, though note that some of these are free trials for a paid service.

Forwarding sites are set up specifically for sending files to other people, and are the latest addition to the armory of services available on the Internet. The one which first built a reliable reputation is yousendit.com which offers a free trial for files up to 2GB (2000MB). You send the file to their server. They send a link to the person whose email address you give. The file is deleted from their server in 7 days' time.

Type "send large files" into your search engine to find more services of this kind, some free, and some which have lower filesize limits and/or require you to set up an account even if it is free, giving them additional info about you.

All these have simple websites which invite you to browse for the file you want to send. On clicking the button you open a standard file dialog on your computer as you would to select a file in any program resident on your own drives.

Most of these sites have a limit on the number of downloads of any one file to try to limit misuse. They are intended for file transfer, not to make large files available to everyone.

Many give little indication of how quickly the upload is taking place, so I would suggest trying a small file first to assure yourself it is working and see what the indication is of a successful transfer. If you are paranoid about the likely effect on Aunt Daisy of getting an email which is sent by the service telling her to download the file, then fill in your own email address as the intended recipient. You will get the message giving the file address details and you can send this link in an email which really does go direct from you.

Sending large files by one of these methods will also help avoid the problem where the recipient has an email they want urgently blocked because your large file is first in the queue, and they really do not have the time to download that first. Keep Aunt Daisy happy by not sending your photos as email attachments.

Telstra forces a customer to switch

Nick Renton is an author of more than 60 books on taxation, investment, financial planning, public relations, corporate governance, meeting procedure and use of English. He is also a skilled copyeditor. By profession he is an actuary and is often called upon as an arbitrator. He is Member of the Order of Australia (entitled to 'AM' after his name) and was the first president of the Australian Shareholders' Association.

He also has an extensive web site which provides information of all his specialist areas. It is a source referenced by many other sites throughout the world.

However, Nick Renton AM has been forced to move the whole site because the hosts decided they did not want to provide web space for their broadband and dialup customers any more. So, with a couple of months notice, he was told the site will be gone. No, they had no way they could point the old address to a new one.

It serves as a lesson for anyone who has a web site that is not reached by their own domain name. Now, Nick Renton has moved the whole lot to http://nickrenton.com, and while we know the new hosting company, and know they have been around for many years, it cannot be a problem again: the site can be moved to a new host at a few hours' notice with no one who uses the site being aware of any change.

But now comes the surprise: the hosting company that was being used by Nick Renton was not a newcomer from the continuing dotcom revolution. It was Telstra, the first and largest telecommunications company in Australia, which has the lions' share of the Internet business in this country.

So, if you need information such as a guide to all the Latin phrases you are likely to come across, at http://nickrenton.com/310.htm then make a note that it is all now at http://nickrenton.com

Paying for less than no hosting

Why would a business pay out good money for a web domain address and then have nothing at the other end? I came across a hotel the other day where the link just produces the generic "unable to find a server of that name" response and decided that as it is one where we intended to go to eat, I'd check a little further. Yes, the domain is registered, and to a company which obviously owns the hotel. However, this was not just a temporrary glitch. Yet the web site of the hotel is included in all their advertisements, in local newspapers, in regional tourist magazines and even on some general web sites of where to eat. So I asked. I was told by the manager that their designer was working on a new site and that their web site would be back in "a month or so". When I suggested that they were paying for the name anyway and that most registrars or site hosts would charge no extra to put up a "site under construction" page with, at least, their address and phone numbers, I got a blank stare and a kind of grunt which I took to mean "we'll find out about that". Most of the clients I host are in touch if their site is offline for even a few minutes. How can I find ones like this who don't mind if it is off line for months? As I write this another month has gone by and the site is still offline, and still being advertised.