<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Scribkin - Latest Comments in Short URLs Equals Expanded Browsers?</title><link>http://scribkin.disqus.com/</link><description>where code and culture converge</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Mar 2009 13:28:03 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Short URLs Equals Expanded Browsers?</title><link>http://www.scribkin.com/2008/12/03/short-urls-equals-expanded-browsers/#comment-6996098</link><description>Well, I personally feel that the 140 character limit for URL length is not all that strict.   Those who still wish to shorten their URLS can try Tr.im - which is a cool and fast application that is easy to use.  Tr.im is designed to integrate with Twitter.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">submitd</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 08 Mar 2009 13:28:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Short URLs Equals Expanded Browsers?</title><link>http://www.scribkin.com/2008/12/03/short-urls-equals-expanded-browsers/#comment-5856401</link><description>There has to be a limit to everything.   140 characters is fine with me.  Tinyurl helps to shorten the url is great.  It also helps to cover the real url which is of great help to people doing affiliate/referral marketing.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">singaporeescorts</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 01:22:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Short URLs Equals Expanded Browsers?</title><link>http://www.scribkin.com/2008/12/03/short-urls-equals-expanded-browsers/#comment-4168125</link><description>So are you saying that Twitter should go *shorter*?  Bold, man.  Bold.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eng1ne</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:55:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Short URLs Equals Expanded Browsers?</title><link>http://www.scribkin.com/2008/12/03/short-urls-equals-expanded-browsers/#comment-4162684</link><description>I devoted half of my last tweet to a URL. If 140 characters is a good limit, 70 can be better.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Andy Skelton</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:46:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Short URLs Equals Expanded Browsers?</title><link>http://www.scribkin.com/2008/12/03/short-urls-equals-expanded-browsers/#comment-4157891</link><description>Ok yeah, before you say it, my lack of research is plain.. see: &lt;a href="http://lifehacker.com/5048472/longurl-expands-short-urls-so-you-know-where-youre-going" rel="nofollow"&gt;this LifeHacker article&lt;/a&gt; about some solutions already out there.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But my desire to see additional information harvested at the same time, plus my final thought are still perfectly valid!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eng1ne</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:29:23 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>