I suppose relative linking improves download time very fractionaly as there is less code but only a very little bit.
I used to use relative linking more before I started using server side technology because I could tests my website offline. I still use it where I can but I don't really think there is many disadvantages/advantages. Although I am sure sombody would prove me wrong.
Fletch
[This message has been edited by adamfletch (edited April 27, 2000).]
I personally use relative linking, but there are advantages and disadvantages to each.
Relative linking
With this the browser must calculate the URL, in other words it must go through a series of processes to discover the URL. It has to know what to add on to what.
Absolute linking
This type of linking lets the browser know immediately where to go without it having to find out, like in relative linking. This does however, make a big difference on a site like Yahoo where there were (at last count) 200 links. Let's say the page was at: http://www.marthastewart.com/gardening/picks/topten.htm
And Martha (lol, the Web designer) wanted to link to http://www.marthastewart.com/ .
If relative was used, the link would be:
/ (1 character)
If absolute was used, the link would be: http://www.marthastewart.com/ (29 chars)
Multiply this example link by 10 times, and you've got 280 characters that could've been saved. That equals .28 kilobytes, or 280 bytes. For extreme-html-optimizers like myself, any savings is good.
Make your choice!
------------------
Who the heck is Gen. Failure and why does he want to read my hard drive?
Soon to come: Aspology.com
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks