0

While I have no idea how the Apple people actually use rdar:// URLs, allegedly these URLs are supposed to be easily clickable links used by their internal bug tracking system.

When people submit a radar to bugreport.apple.com, they occasionally document that they did so in various venues, including StackOverflow. And sometimes, other people want to refer to these links.

How about allowing rdar://-prefixed URLs being allowed in links, in case an Apple employee stumbles upon an interesting bug she wants to review?

2
  • 2
    Well now. While the down votes on the question would make me sad on StackOverflow, in this case they don't. The community has spoken :-) May 28 '13 at 19:56
  • 3
    If someone wanted to create a public link to a particular bug report, they can already post it on Open Radar and link to the issue there. Beyond that, all an Apple employee needs is a bug ID, so not having a clickable link isn't that much of a hassle for them. May 28 '13 at 19:59
25

First I've heard of such a thing existing, but let's follow it through.

Your feature request would create links that lead nowhere for everyone who is not an Apple employee with access to their bug tracking system? In essence, it would confuse at least 99.9989729% of the human race. It doesn't seem like it would bring much benefit to Stack Overflow.

If someone wants to state that they've filed a bug report they can post the reference and the employee can look it up themselves.

6
  • Sounds reasonable. I'd accept if I could (timeout: ~5 min) May 28 '13 at 19:47
  • 3
    I think your percentage may be off by 0.000001%
    – animuson StaffMod
    May 28 '13 at 19:48
  • 7
    It's based on the estimate of the world population and the total number of Apple employees (both according to Wikipedia) so I don't expect it to be horrendously accurate @animuson :-). If anything it's an underestimate as I doubt many Apple employees actually have access to their bug tracking systems... May 28 '13 at 19:50
  • 3
    There's a 36.475% chance that your comment does not represent reality @Bart. (Please note this commenter does not guarantee the accuracy of this comment and is not liable for any actions taken on the data contained herein.) May 28 '13 at 19:59
  • @benisuǝqbackwards you missed a 9. It should be 99.9989729%. Unless my eyesight has gotten that much worse... :)
    – TronicZomB
    May 28 '13 at 20:06
  • 1
    I did say it wasn't that accurate @Tronic. Thanks :-). May 28 '13 at 20:13

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .