That's why I say "dub dub dub" it confuses people and I have to explain that it's www which is short for world wide web but I saved a little bit of time by saying dub dub dub......wait a minute......
It saves a lot of time once you have established it. You invest time when establishing it and get a fraction of it back once a mentionable amount of people know it
If serious, it's because double-you, double-you, double-you (6 syllables) vs world-wide-web (3 syllables). A syllable sort of represents the amount of time it takes to say something.
It was a poor explanation. Double you has 3 syllables so it has nine all up vs 3. So it takes 3 times as long. I don’t think it was about the time but the ease of saying it. World Wide Web is a bit annoying to say
I’ve no better answer than “It just isn’t done.” Native English speakers at the very least would not interpret that as indicating the letter, they would interpret it as someone stuttering or what they’re trying to say is stuck on the tip of their tongue.
It's a long story. In short: In Latin script u and v were the same letter "u" but had two pronunciations depending on whether it was being used as a vowel or consonant. But when adapting the alphabet to Germanic languages (including Old English) the same two sounds were from two different letters, so they put two "u"s together to make double u: vv.
Usually same as our compound letter "ij", similar but not quite how you'd prononuce the word "eye".
Less commonly it's pronounced as "i-grec" (greek i) or "ypsilon".
In the same way that English Wikipedia is https://en.wikipedia.org/ and Spanish is https://es.wikipedia.org/, there is nothing stopping any website from making www.blah.com point to something different than blah.com. It's just a convention.
Here in france, everyone says "3w". Pronouncing it entirely sounds like "Double V, double V, double V" so "3w" sounds like "Trois double V", which funnily enough, is still longer than world wide web!
Watching old commercials is hilarious. "If YOU would like to see our locations on the world-wide-web, visit our website on your web browser by typing in w, w, w, dot, appliance, dash, direct, dot, com!"
I usually even type "https://". Even when I'm just using a browser and not writing code.
I think it's probably the case that these days the modern browsers will automatically give you https without having to type it out (and maybe only give you the http site if the https url doesn't work?)
But there was definitely a time when typing wikipedia.org into an address bar would give you an http:// address.
A lot of sites even then would immediately redirect you to an https version, but if you put a whole-ass path in, the request for that path would go over the internet tubes in plaintext before the the redirect came back. Which is roughly no better in many cases than if the site doesn't even redirect you to an https version.
when visiting my dutch family I noticed how faster "vay vay vay" is, so I started thinking vévévé in french instead of "double v" x3 (btw this is a double u : uu)
I've said it out loud a few times by accident and people don't question it. I think we all agree it's a bit silly to pronounce.
Because it's super old fashioned. I'd expect that most of the time you host a website, you want your default domain to be the website, because that's almost exclusively the one people might have to type in or read.
You can use content-type, accept, and/or user-agent headers to route to the appropriate non-html resources and APIs, or if you really need, those are the resources hidden behind client-specific or purpose-specific subdomains.
If they're not making their default domain their website, then I don't believe they take their website seriously.
There are many many reasons you don't want to (or can't) have the apex of your domain (what you're calling the "default domain") the primary domain name of your site. I thought you were going to argue in favor of like "home.[domain].com" or something.
The first and foremost issue is that if you wish to use a CDN, many CDN's require a CNAME to function properly. You can't have a CNAME share space with any other record (RFC 1912) which completely precludes using an MX record (for email) or TXT records for DKIM, SPF, and DMARC. (You need those for a secure email service). Having the CNAME sit as a subdomain of the apex (such as www) allows you to maintain those records in your domain while also serving people using that CNAME. (Some CDN's such as Akamai even have special proprietary records that function like a CNAME while returning A records just to make this work)
I'm skeptical that you're giving the full story, given the number of popular websites I see that use apex domains and have assets on the page that they'd want to deliver via CDN.
You don't typical have your webpage itself delivered by CDN, you have your static assets delivered by CDN. Why can't you put your static assets in a subdomain that gets a CNAME? Then your apex domain is also a host, and the webserver at the host is able to serve content / proxy according to the request headers.
If your entire website is static content, then I'm probably not taking it very seriously.
No, you're right. There's a much bigger story here. I was just trimming out a lot of it since I don't normally run into people who can follow along easily. Akamai, for example, uses the proprietary AKAMAICDN record to allow the functionality of a CNAME. For example: foo.com AKAMAICDN's to foo.com.edgekey.net (edgekey.net of course being the Akamai edge server suite). So someone using Akamai can do that to allow them to use the apex (but will still very likely have a www.foo.com CNAME foo.com setup to catch people who did a www anyway) Cloudflare uses CNAME flattening to "cheat" the CNAME rules by doing the CNAME DNS lookup internally and pretending to be authoritative for the request.
You don’t typical have your webpage itself delivered by CDN, you have your static assets delivered by CDN. Why can’t you put your static assets in a subdomain that gets a CNAME?
You can most certainly put static assets in a specific subdomain (and in fact, that's how most setups are), but the CDN itself often requires handling the entire request at the beginning. You don't want, for example, an A record at the apex pointing directly at your origin servers (terrible idea for security & performance; kind of defeats the purpose of the CDN), instead you want the user to connect to an edge server and have that edge server immediately serve the static content while the origin is contacted by the edge server for any non-static content that the user needs. This allows the CDN to do their cloud magic while your origin servers can do as little work as possible with as few people as possible. Effectively, you can block all requests to your servers that are not from your CDN. Many CDNs these days are also a major security feature.
So this is right at the limits of my understanding - I'm not a web admin, and I'm not a DNS dev; I'm a webapp backend dev. I'm coming at this from the perspective of best-practices for API and service design.
I'm generally talking about webpages that are services, both because that's what I work on, and because that's when trust actually matters to me. In these cases, a lot of page content is dynamic and cannot be hosted by a CDN.
For domains that are hosting services, it makes sense to have a subdomain for each service or class or service, but the only client that makes the URL visible is the browser so I want my landing page to not require typing in a subdomain, to reduce friction.
Subdomains are then defined by their purpose to the user, not by the type of resource they're hosting. The typo of resource is determined by the accept header. If a client wants to access a resource using HTML or by xml or by json or by txt, they specify that in the header, and the webserver returns the resource in the requested representation.
Using a subdomain for a specific representation rather than for a specific utility seems lazy, which sets off red flags, if I'm required to enter it.
Edit, just in case it's useful to explain what I mean by subdomain "purpose".
To use a fictional version of Google where they didn't have separate branding for all their services.
Search: search.google.com
Video: video.google.com
Music: music.video.com
Gmail: mail.google.com
Productivity suite: office.google.com
Etc.
These are what I feel subdomains are best used for. Clients can use headers to control how the resources for each of those services get represented. You don't have representation-specific subdomains. If you only offer one service, then you don't need subdomains; you can still have them but don't force your users to use it, and probably still best to name it after the purpose, in case the company expands into other product domains.
It's like the difference between "package by feature" and "package by layer". Having a representation-specific subdomain is packaging by layer.
I'm skeptical that you're giving the full story, given the number of popular websites I see that use apex domains and have assets on the page that they'd want to deliver via CDN.
Have you tried accessing a www subdomain on those popular websites? I guarantee you that they are there.
To play devil's advocate, yes, "w" is technically three syllables in English, but they're easy enough to blur together. Meanwhile, the actual "w" sound is comparatively labor intensive, and "-orld" even more so. We're in purple burglar alarm world.
I think we should sit down and take the shortest syllable version of each word/expression from each language and combine them all into one fast language.
(I understand the joke, please don't explain it)
Dreifaches Doppel-Du
HTTP Error 400
My favorite joke
That's why I say "dub dub dub" it confuses people and I have to explain that it's www which is short for world wide web but I saved a little bit of time by saying dub dub dub......wait a minute......
honestly I think w should be renamed "dub". stupid long-ass name for a single letter
Yeah dub would bring it back in line with all the other letters, which are single syllable. Get your shit together, W.
It saves a lot of time once you have established it. You invest time when establishing it and get a fraction of it back once a mentionable amount of people know it
Dubya dubya dubya
FUCK no
Three-dubs
I read that is dumb dumb dumb
Pro wrestling fans of ECW support your cause.
.....Double You Bee
not in my language
At least we have Japanese beat.
ダブルユー ダブルユー ダブルユー or daburuyu daburuyu daburuyu
12 syllables vs 9 haha
Spanish would be doble ve doble ve doble ve
In double checking my work, it looks like the alphabet got reduced and the name of w changed.
Now it's doble uve doble uve doble uve
If serious, it's because double-you, double-you, double-you (6 syllables) vs world-wide-web (3 syllables). A syllable sort of represents the amount of time it takes to say something.
So it takes twice as long to say www.
If not serious, yes, it's because your German. But then again, German humor isn't really that.
I wasn’t serious, but thanks for the explanation!
I’m sure it’s helpful for someone
It was a poor explanation. Double you has 3 syllables so it has nine all up vs 3. So it takes 3 times as long. I don’t think it was about the time but the ease of saying it. World Wide Web is a bit annoying to say
I don't think it does take 3 x as long to say though, I think they both take about the same amount of time. Double-u is easy to say.
(Happy cake day! )
Yes it is, but why not just say the sound of the letter?
Way-way-way / wee-wee-wee / wuh-wuh-wuh ?
Even the dub-dub-dub someone else suggested would work.
No wonder everyone dropped the
www.from their urls ¯\_(ツ)_/¯I’ve no better answer than “It just isn’t done.” Native English speakers at the very least would not interpret that as indicating the letter, they would interpret it as someone stuttering or what they’re trying to say is stuck on the tip of their tongue.
Hang on. Don't Germans say it "doobla-veh?"
Nope, that would be the French 🥖
Yea, I was surprised a German wouldn't get it, with English borrowing so much from German.
But thanks for the chuckle!
It's worse! 9 syllables!
Per other poster, dou-ble-you (I didn’t catch that myself)
Haha woah I had to sound it out
Always gotta clap the syllables!
you're*
Look man English isn't a language it's a mistake
In Dutch www is faster. Never understood why one would give a letter a name that consists of 2 parts.
I don't get why w is called double u when it's clearly a double v
It's a long story. In short: In Latin script u and v were the same letter "u" but had two pronunciations depending on whether it was being used as a vowel or consonant. But when adapting the alphabet to Germanic languages (including Old English) the same two sounds were from two different letters, so they put two "u"s together to make double u: vv.
The full story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg2j7mZ9-2Y
In some languages (Spanish, for example) it's double v.
U and V used to be the same letter
how do you pronounce Y ?
In Flanders (at least where I'm at) we usually say I grec, but when doing math or reciting the alphabet, we say IJ.
Usually same as our compound letter "ij", similar but not quite how you'd prononuce the word "eye". Less commonly it's pronounced as "i-grec" (greek i) or "ypsilon".
i-grec (but English sound for "e" just like in Dutch) is the French way as well.
Sound like igrek.
it's two words ("i graeca")
We say it just like I wrote it, as one word. Although some people use Griekse IJ, which is also two words.
and how would you say xyz ?
XIJZ.
Iks Üpsilon Zett
In Swedish I pronounce y as y. It has its own sound and doesn't sound like another letter, so it can't be written as a combination of other letters.
Üpsilon
In Irish we say "wuh". And "punk" for dot.
Wuh wuh wuh punk lemmy punk world
Sounds like dubstep!
Irish Dubstep
Dublin-step
I like the Spanish radio commercials like you’ll hear in California:
(website dot com and in a booming voice)
in Germany we say weh and punkt
veh written with english pronunciation in mind
Back in the day at work we used 'dub-dub-dub' for www. (around 2000)
Hahahaha, love it!
i've often heard it called dubdubdub
By breakfast crews on crappy radio stations.
Possibly
wee wee wee
All the way home
Weeeee3
In Dutch it’s whey-whey-whey.
I still remember when companies started mentioning their websites in commercials.
It was one big torrent of whey-whey-wheys.
Same in Russian - it's something like "wehwehweh"
Same in German.
Well, In German it's also grammatically correct
Close to whe in when.
So the solution is very simple: everyone should become dutch
In Italian it's "vuvuvu", ez
that's my 6th favourite thing about Italy
I speak Dutch but (we, in this region) don't pronounce the y sound at the end.
“Dub dub dub”.
It has to be 30 years that I've been using this. I might have said the full term a couple times at the start but that quickly ended.
If you skip the "b", you can speed it up even more with "dudududu" to include the dot.
Trip dub
Dub Dub Dub.
But also, "the web." "Online."
Not in Sweden. Veveve.
I love it and will marry it.
"hexa-u"
I do not pronounce that part of a URL. Who still does that? Why would you need to do that?
Because
www.example.comandexample.com, while the same website nearly all of the time, are technically different and could point to different places.True. And there's also the websites that use "en." or some other language code, and "www." just leads to the language selection.
Please, tell me more
In the same way that English Wikipedia is https://en.wikipedia.org/ and Spanish is https://es.wikipedia.org/, there is nothing stopping any website from making
www.blah.compoint to something different thanblah.com. It's just a convention.https://serverfault.com/a/286141/374631
Some people don't know how to properly DNS, and IIRC some smaller DNS services don't support CNAMEing the root.
Because it's an artifact from a time when having a website for a business was entirely optional, and novel. This wasn't happening everywhere.
Here in france, everyone says "3w". Pronouncing it entirely sounds like "Double V, double V, double V" so "3w" sounds like "Trois double V", which funnily enough, is still longer than world wide web!
I always hear "triple double-V" in Quebec French.
But in French "W" is often abbreviated to "V". Like BMW --> Beh Ehm Veh (often shortened even further to "Beh Ehm").
So WWW would be "veh veh veh".
In any case "World Wide Web" is quite the mouthful for the average French speaker.
BMW is a German company. Are you sure that's not just people saying it in German?
The French using a foreign language? Ha!
Joke aside no, and I'm a native French speaker living in a French speaking region.
Sure, but you sound like an absolute psycho saying "world wide web.MidgetPorn.edu"
I'd like to know what scholarships are available for that.
Check them out at world wide web.ClownPenis.org
Now I want to listen to come chiptunes.
https://youtu.be/L0gOUmQ39uk?si=75WBsRRoNtUr9SNp
Just pronounce it “wuhwuhwuh”
Dubdubdub
Watching old commercials is hilarious. "If YOU would like to see our locations on the world-wide-web, visit our website on your web browser by typing in w, w, w, dot, appliance, dash, direct, dot, com!"
My favorite was "The Information Superhighway."
It sounds too complicated for me. Probably intended for more advanced users.
We could fix this by renaming it the Worbledy Widewibble Webbledywoowoo.
But you don't type world wide web. You type www.
Do you really type www?
I usually even type "https://". Even when I'm just using a browser and not writing code.
I think it's probably the case that these days the modern browsers will automatically give you https without having to type it out (and maybe only give you the http site if the https url doesn't work?)
But there was definitely a time when typing
wikipedia.orginto an address bar would give you anhttp://address.A lot of sites even then would immediately redirect you to an https version, but if you put a whole-ass path in, the request for that path would go over the internet tubes in plaintext before the the redirect came back. Which is roughly no better in many cases than if the site doesn't even redirect you to an https version.
Firefox has a setting to force https
That's what "https Everywhere" was for, although yeah not really needed anymore.
No one types www
It's https//:
Link doesn't work for some reason..
well i sure hate that last picture
"triple dub"
6U
Trip dubs.
Tr’ubs
Six.
I generally say “werwerwer”.
wawawa
sorry not sorry
ViViVi
...or EmacsEmacEmacs, if that's your thing.
when visiting my dutch family I noticed how faster "vay vay vay" is, so I started thinking vévévé in french instead of "double v" x3 (btw this is a double u : uu) I've said it out loud a few times by accident and people don't question it. I think we all agree it's a bit silly to pronounce.
...
I have an intense and fascinating life.
we pronounce it va ya yay
For my own edification, you pronounce vévévé as vah-yah-yay?
Call it WoWaWe
That's why it's pronounced dub-dub-dub.
I don't trust websites that still start with
www.Why not? (Serious question, I'm a DNS engineer so this is super relevant to me)
Because it's super old fashioned. I'd expect that most of the time you host a website, you want your default domain to be the website, because that's almost exclusively the one people might have to type in or read.
You can use
content-type,accept, and/oruser-agentheaders to route to the appropriate non-html resources and APIs, or if you really need, those are the resources hidden behind client-specific or purpose-specific subdomains.If they're not making their default domain their website, then I don't believe they take their website seriously.
There are many many reasons you don't want to (or can't) have the apex of your domain (what you're calling the "default domain") the primary domain name of your site. I thought you were going to argue in favor of like "home.[domain].com" or something.
The first and foremost issue is that if you wish to use a CDN, many CDN's require a CNAME to function properly. You can't have a CNAME share space with any other record (RFC 1912) which completely precludes using an MX record (for email) or TXT records for DKIM, SPF, and DMARC. (You need those for a secure email service). Having the CNAME sit as a subdomain of the apex (such as www) allows you to maintain those records in your domain while also serving people using that CNAME. (Some CDN's such as Akamai even have special proprietary records that function like a CNAME while returning A records just to make this work)
I'm skeptical that you're giving the full story, given the number of popular websites I see that use apex domains and have assets on the page that they'd want to deliver via CDN.
You don't typical have your webpage itself delivered by CDN, you have your static assets delivered by CDN. Why can't you put your static assets in a subdomain that gets a CNAME? Then your apex domain is also a host, and the webserver at the host is able to serve content / proxy according to the request headers.
If your entire website is static content, then I'm probably not taking it very seriously.
No, you're right. There's a much bigger story here. I was just trimming out a lot of it since I don't normally run into people who can follow along easily. Akamai, for example, uses the proprietary AKAMAICDN record to allow the functionality of a CNAME. For example: foo.com AKAMAICDN's to foo.com.edgekey.net (edgekey.net of course being the Akamai edge server suite). So someone using Akamai can do that to allow them to use the apex (but will still very likely have a www.foo.com CNAME foo.com setup to catch people who did a www anyway) Cloudflare uses CNAME flattening to "cheat" the CNAME rules by doing the CNAME DNS lookup internally and pretending to be authoritative for the request.
You can most certainly put static assets in a specific subdomain (and in fact, that's how most setups are), but the CDN itself often requires handling the entire request at the beginning. You don't want, for example, an A record at the apex pointing directly at your origin servers (terrible idea for security & performance; kind of defeats the purpose of the CDN), instead you want the user to connect to an edge server and have that edge server immediately serve the static content while the origin is contacted by the edge server for any non-static content that the user needs. This allows the CDN to do their cloud magic while your origin servers can do as little work as possible with as few people as possible. Effectively, you can block all requests to your servers that are not from your CDN. Many CDNs these days are also a major security feature.
So this is right at the limits of my understanding - I'm not a web admin, and I'm not a DNS dev; I'm a webapp backend dev. I'm coming at this from the perspective of best-practices for API and service design.
I'm generally talking about webpages that are services, both because that's what I work on, and because that's when trust actually matters to me. In these cases, a lot of page content is dynamic and cannot be hosted by a CDN.
For domains that are hosting services, it makes sense to have a subdomain for each service or class or service, but the only client that makes the URL visible is the browser so I want my landing page to not require typing in a subdomain, to reduce friction.
Subdomains are then defined by their purpose to the user, not by the type of resource they're hosting. The typo of resource is determined by the
acceptheader. If a client wants to access a resource using HTML or by xml or by json or by txt, they specify that in the header, and the webserver returns the resource in the requested representation.Using a subdomain for a specific representation rather than for a specific utility seems lazy, which sets off red flags, if I'm required to enter it.
Edit, just in case it's useful to explain what I mean by subdomain "purpose".
To use a fictional version of Google where they didn't have separate branding for all their services.
Search: search.google.com
Video: video.google.com
Music: music.video.com
Gmail: mail.google.com
Productivity suite: office.google.com
Etc.
These are what I feel subdomains are best used for. Clients can use headers to control how the resources for each of those services get represented. You don't have representation-specific subdomains. If you only offer one service, then you don't need subdomains; you can still have them but don't force your users to use it, and probably still best to name it after the purpose, in case the company expands into other product domains.
It's like the difference between "package by feature" and "package by layer". Having a representation-specific subdomain is packaging by layer.
Have you tried accessing a www subdomain on those popular websites? I guarantee you that they are there.
That's fine, but that's not the url I had to type in or navigate to.
You said that you don't trust it. Yet all of these websites have it.
What don't you trust? Whether you type in www or not, it goes to the same place.
When is it necessary to say www?
Just now!
When they set the site up poopy
Usually happens in the reverse though, so it’s necessary to say it when you need to verbally communicate:
“Hey your site works when I visit
example.combutwww.example.comnever loads”Still twice as long to say as word wide web!
true story. Just as many syllables as 1 W.
Anyone else not realize the swirls were part of a watermark and just think that was supposed to be part of his haircut?
Even faster to say Net
To play devil's advocate, yes, "w" is technically three syllables in English, but they're easy enough to blur together. Meanwhile, the actual "w" sound is comparatively labor intensive, and "-orld" even more so. We're in purple burglar alarm world.
"doub-ya"
Say "dubdubdub" or "dubbadubdub". "winwinwin" would also be acceptable.
Double-you, double-you, double-you.
Double U, double double U, full stop, butterfield diet, full stop, Cee Oh Em.
Dubya dubya dubya is slightly faster
In spanish we use, "three W" as WWW xD
I think we should sit down and take the shortest syllable version of each word/expression from each language and combine them all into one fast language.
Tridub
Visit us at double you double you double you double you double you dot!
"wwww."?
wwwww.
HTTP colon backslash backslash
(I know they're not backslashes.)
Wuh wuh wuh
Anyone else say
"DUBBA U DUBBA U DUBBA U"
ooga ooga ooga
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jz3XGRqQL8I&t=80
Kids these days don't remember President Dubya I guess 😔
Dub is short for win.
I don’t even think we say it anymore in the US. Just whatever.com
Trick is to go southern with it. Merge the last two vowel sounds into almost-one. Dub-ee-eh
I think this is why a lot of sites stopped using it!
U to the sixth power. Damnit not shorter.
Six U's. There.
3 W
I'm gonna start using worldwideweb as my default subdomain now.
world.wide.web
I'm gonna start saying "wild wild west"