please forgive me... i'm fairly new at this but i have heard recently that file names should not begin with a # when naming things for the web.

Is this true and why?

Most of my images for the few sites i have built are named by their SKU item reference i.e. "01-101.jpg" / should these all be changed? kinda a pain in the *** for me / hoping to avoid it.

Also... heard that "camel backing" is also a bad practice as some Unix servers have trouble with capital letters... Is this true? ie: "thisExample.html" / i thought i was doing right by this?

My sites work with these naming conventions so i dont understand why this isnt good practice?

Any advice on the subject is greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

that file names should not begin with a # when naming things for the web.

It's rubbish

The disallowed characters in file names are " * : < > ? | \

Special characters in URIs are = | ; | / | # | ? | : | space

Also... heard that "camel backing" is also a bad practice as some Unix servers have trouble with capital letters... Is this true? ie: "thisExample.html" / i thought i was doing right by this?

BamelCaps is the term.
And that's drivel as well.
Use camelcaps by all means.
The REAL fact is that *nix servers are case sensitive, so ThisFile.Ext is NOT the same as thisfile.ext on *nix servers BUT as Windows is NOT case sensitive, ThisFile.ext, THISFILE.ext or thisFile.EXT would be all the same.

BEING CONSISTENTis the key.

I try to name all files in lower case, and remove any spaces.

thanks for the responses...

I'm not sure why i was told that #'s should NOT be used in the first character... Maybe it is related to SEO or something? Appreciate the correction chrishirst.

I also heard lower case is a good idea as well... as long as dashes or underscores are used for separators - ie: "this-example.html". According to this article (http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/dashes-vs-underscores/) dashes seem to be better suited for SEO for Google. Not sure if this is drivel as well?

You know, I just had to test this for the # symbol.

Actually putting a # anywhere in the file name, not just as the first character, causes browsers to treat the rest of the filename as a document fragment identifier.

sorry can you translate that for me?

does that mean it is not a good idea?

what happens?

i just received a response from an adobe forum that may be useful in explaining the # issue...

"Even though many naming conventions are frowned upon that include starting with #@!, etc. the only ones not to use in images are " (quotes), # or - (dash).

This is mainly due to the interpretation of such items by the browser engine or server you are using. Also avoid spaces and . (dots) in the name where possible as many servers/browsers will interpret these wrong, (except using the . as a delimiters between file name and file type).

The basic principle to work on is, if you use 101-10.jpg and it works, do not worry, but be aware that if you use the same naming on another server it may not.

-PZ"

After hours of searching on google i was surprised this information wasn't retally more available.

I hope others find this useful.

Originally Posted by Brandon

I try to name all files in lower case, and remove any spaces.

me too, I do the same, and I don't have such problems. In fact I didn't know that using # causes errors, but still I want to say that you can do without it. I mean why do you have to use it in the first place?

Originally Posted by AmieStuart

me too, I do the same, and I don't have such problems. In fact I didn't know that using # causes errors, but still I want to say that you can do without it. I mean why do you have to use it in the first place?

Hey Amie,

dont really have to but when i first created the site i based most of the image names on the product SKU item reference. I never actually had a problem with this myself but recently heard this was bad practice and was just needing confirmation.

The images actually display fine with the current naming but apparently i will need to watch for any issues if the site is moved to another server.

with that said... i will most likely not bother changing these image names until i absolutely have to.

curious... whats is the consensus on the dash vs. underscore debate in regards to separator. ie. "this-example.html" vs. "this_example.html"

Does it really make a difference in SEO?

Search engines treat the "dash" (-) as a space in most circumstances. Supposedly they treat the underscore the same way, though personally I have yet to see evidence to support that.

Underscores when used in URLs can be mistaken as a space when linked

That's it! the pros & cons of the long running pointless "debate" on "underscore" vs "dash"

Thanks all for the response and info!

Happy new year by the way!
2010 ( holy crap : )

Originally Posted by yolksac

curious... whats is the consensus on the dash vs. underscore debate in regards to separator. ie. "this-example.html" vs. "this_example.html"

Does it really make a difference in SEO?

No SEO difference but users will be able to see hyphenated words in the URL if you use underscores for spaces.

When creating and uploading files intended for the accessof a website, please ensure that you follow the filename conventions below. The website is automated using scripts which rely on standardized filenaming conventions to create the web pages. Additionally, following the conventions makes it easier for people downloading a file to identify it.

Filenames should contain exactly one dot (period), used to separate the filename from the 3-character extension indicating the content-type of the file (e.g., pdf for Adobe PDF documents).

It is critical that filenames do not include spaces, hash signs, or other unusual characters. Please use only alphanumeric characters, hyphens and exactly one period.

It should also contain 'Dash' Or 'Underscore'.

Using Your Popular Keywords is again advantageous.

For further assistance kindly visit:

http://www.ieee802.org/1/filenaming.html

http://www.websitetoad.com/file-naming-conventions.htm

http://www.bnl.gov/webstandards/fileNaming.asp