Vaguely related to:
Links to URLs containing parentheses

This is likely to do with encoding URLs for safety, but here's a case that works in the preview and the rollover title is "Speakers" yet breaks when posted:

[Boston Dev Days][1]

  [1]: http://stackoverflow.carsonified.com/events/boston/(Speakers)

The outcome looks like this: Boston Dev Days

While the preview looks like this: Boston Dev Days

If you haven't yet spotted the difference, please mouse over each link above.

It is proper to put a space between the url and the parenthesis, but the preview accepts the improper format.
I might note this is a preview bug.
The preview will lead you to think that the format shown is a correct way of adding a comment/title to a url. It is not.

Also breaks if you use [multiple words][4] yet shows in the preview fine. And lastly, if you make a code block like the one I just made, then use control-L to link a word later on, the url number for [1] which should have been the "outcome" line, becomes [2] and [1] remains assigned as it was, but is mistakenly assigned to the non-linked text in the code block.

Clearly these are minor, but it's worth noting for completeness.

[4]: http://stackoverflow.carsonified.com/events/boston/(multiple words)

  • I always give my links names [Perl::Module]: http://search.cpan.org/perldoc/Perl::Module Aug 27, 2009 at 22:11
  • 1
    Dupe: Links to URLs containing parentheses, additionally, spaces are not valid URL characters Aug 27, 2009 at 22:12
  • yeah, when you look at the PREVIEW the (multiple words) are not parsed as part of the URL. You are misled to believe that the format host/path(comment) is acceptable. It is not. So the preview is wrong. Simple?
    – dlamblin
    Aug 28, 2009 at 17:31

2 Answers 2


Probably that feature ( or bug ) was introduced around the time Jeff wrote this:

The Problem With URLs



The title issues are fixed now (or will be after the next deployment). The URL numbering bug I cannot reproduce; considering that this bug report is almost 1 1/2 years old, this has probably been fixed since then.

You must log in to answer this question.

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