Re^6: Bookmarklet to show deeplinks in perldoc.perl.org

the #hash part for deep-linking to anchors

Oh... So you're not talking about path parts. You're talking about fragment parts — URI parts

So in some sense this is a form of link rot. I think there will always be some risk of this, since we don't have any control over how any external web site manages their anchors — nor indeed their paths — nor indeed even the domain names.

It's the nature of the beast. People put external links in their posts; ten years later those links don't work. We just have to live with the risk.

In general, I'd prefer to stay with perldoc.perl.org, since it is "official". I think we'd need a really compelling reason to switch to something else. Like we did with MetaCPAN.

I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.

Comment on Re^6: Bookmarklet to show deeplinks in perldoc.perl.org

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: Bookmarklet to show deeplinks in perldoc.perl.org by LanX (Saint) on Jun 18, 2019 at 15:52 UTC
> You're talking about fragment parts — URI parts the terminology varies depending on the source. the JS function to extract the fragment is called Location.hash() > this is a form of link rot. It's also varying with the version ° of perldoc. Strictly speaking we'd need to keep the version information too. > In general, I'd prefer to stay with perldoc.perl.org I'm fine with this but facilitating deep-linking would help posting ... Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice} °) well better not	[reply]
Re^7: Bookmarklet to show deeplinks in perldoc.perl.org by LanX (Saint) on Jun 18, 2019 at 16:22 UTC
> In general, I'd prefer to stay with perldoc.perl.org, since it is "official" Well official is the release, we used to have our own, now totally outdated, copy. Like split Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice}	[reply]