← Back to context Comment by octatoan 10 years ago Not if you let the first linked page be site.com/1, the next one site.com/2 and so on, I think. 3 comments octatoan Reply recursive 10 years ago Yes, even then.Sure "1" and "2" are pretty short. And even "57834573495879436129386943" is pretty short.But the average link would have so many digits, I couldn't post it in this comment. jonotrain 10 years ago The bookmarks would only need to map to the book locations - you would only need sufficient values for the number of bookmarked pages, not the entire range of possibilities. Tinyyy 10 years ago How does that even make sense? Taking a lower base will only require more characters.
recursive 10 years ago Yes, even then.Sure "1" and "2" are pretty short. And even "57834573495879436129386943" is pretty short.But the average link would have so many digits, I couldn't post it in this comment. jonotrain 10 years ago The bookmarks would only need to map to the book locations - you would only need sufficient values for the number of bookmarked pages, not the entire range of possibilities.
jonotrain 10 years ago The bookmarks would only need to map to the book locations - you would only need sufficient values for the number of bookmarked pages, not the entire range of possibilities.
Tinyyy 10 years ago How does that even make sense? Taking a lower base will only require more characters.
Yes, even then.
Sure "1" and "2" are pretty short. And even "57834573495879436129386943" is pretty short.
But the average link would have so many digits, I couldn't post it in this comment.
The bookmarks would only need to map to the book locations - you would only need sufficient values for the number of bookmarked pages, not the entire range of possibilities.
How does that even make sense? Taking a lower base will only require more characters.