I have a yuuuug bookmarks folder of assorted articles I've come across but haven't had the time to delve into. Now that I'm through my UW classwork I've finally been able to chunk through some of them and today and I came across the (mostly-irrelevant, website-related decision) debate between no-www and www.yes-www.
The debate
The argument by no-www is
that www
is supposedly “deprecated” in that
it's redundant to type. But, if you look at our tech
overlords like Google,
Amazon,
Apple, etc. you'll see that
they redirect no-www to www (more on why later). For what
it's worth though, having no www
has its
minimalism aesthetic and anecdotally most smaller
sites seem to have no www.
yes-www
has actual
technical arguments: (1) you can’t use a CNAME record on a "naked domain"
(that is, sites with no www
) and (2) cookies on
the naked domain get sent to all subdomains (so all
*.mehvix.com
domains) which can mess up caching
for static files.
Changing
Both of the pro-www
points aren't an issue for
me now, but best not to limit myself later down the line. To
swap, I prefaced the domain with www
on this
site's
CNAME on the GitHub
, changed my CNAME
and A
DNS
records so that all prior non-www
links would
go to the new www
version.