> From: JohnInKansas
>
> An IP number is required for ANYTHING THAT CONNECTS TO THE INTERNET.

Exactly, in this context a server, not a page.

> Every time your computer connects to an ISP, your computer must either produce its IP number or must get a new one for the duration of the connection from your ISP. The IP number is used up to the connection with the physical device where the information resides, and normal "file/directory tree" structures are generally used to reach a specific file.

Sigh! I worked in IT from the 80s until I retired. More egg-sucking.

Previously ...

> The next thing after the http;// is the server name, and it's only by custom that many people "name" their main portal server "www." Many people do use the www to distinguish that server from other servers they use for internal traffic on their networks.

... and now ...

> With respect to your imagined "error" at mudcat, you need to recognize that a URL that doesn't start with http:// or www is not a complete and legal URL and will be treated as a local link to a bookmark, with the assumption that the bookmark is to a file at mudcat.

So there's a mutual contradiction there. If you are saying that the URL HAS to begin "http://", why is "www" also being scanned for? And if your answer is "because conventionally etc", then "conventionally etc" any URL not beginning "http://" but containing a TLD is no more or less valid or invalid than one beginning "www" but not "http://www". The most important part of the first section of the URL is the TLD, the second most important the domain name, then any other intervening subdomains, and only then the www subdomain. www is the least important part of the first section of the URL, in fact it's so unimportant that these days it's often omitted altogether.

Mudcat should be checking for a TLD, or not at all.

In a previous thread:

> GUEST Harrison. You apparently used the mudcat "linkmaker" that sometimes fails by adding some extraneous mudcatmudbits to the URL. Some people use it with no problems but I'm not quite that smart, I guess.

... and here ...

> Your explanation that "you never made a mistake" doesn't really hold much water

So again a contradiction. You say in one place that it might have been something to do with Mudcat's system and in another that it must have been me.