Net question.

[griffin]

When it comes to web domains, what's better/easier to admin/more stable/more efficient/etc:

(domain).com.au/something

or

something.(domain).com.au

[jaydisc]

Creating a new (something).domain.com.au (aka hostname or subdomain) requires DNS and web configuration changes. To create a new domain.com.au/(something), you simply create a folder.

[dirge]

Depending on how your registrar works, the (something).domain.com.au can be either easy or a ****** to set up & maintain. As Jay mentioned, the other option only requires a folder - so it's always easy. I guess it comes down to how much works your registrar asks of you vs. how much you care (:

[kurdt_the_goat]

Some hosts will let you setup subdomains directly from the control panel interface without talking to anyone, so i'd login there and see if it's an option. Once it's setup, the main difference is that a subdomain can have it's own document root.

Personally, i think subdomains look nicer/more professional on a business card and are easier to remember, but you're just as likely to have someone say the opposite. Same for "SEO" benefits, there is probably negligible difference between the two.

[jaydisc]

but you're just as likely to have someone say the opposite.

Me

It's really all down to the purpose and application.

Personally, I think a subdomain (not the proper term, but acceptable for the sake of this discussion), should be reserved for situations where the identification of the subdomain differs from the primary domain. For example, if you signup for an account at tumblr.com, you get myblog.tumblr.com, which by my rationale is much more appropriate then tumblr.com/myblog, as myblog.tumblr.com is really a completely different site with different content to [www.]tumblr.com.

An opposing example would be Tumblr's theme directory. Yes, they could have chosen to put this at themes.tumblr.com, but the themes are really an extension of what tumblr.com is about, so they chose the more appropriate URL of tumblr.com/themes.

There are technical reasons for both implementations as well. For example, a cookie assigned at myblog.tumblr.com [by default] will not be usable at tumblr.com. In some cases, this can be advantageous. In others, detrimental, which of course brings me back to my point:

It's really all down to the purpose and application.

Care to offer any more insight?

P.S. The cookie implementation at OTCA is broken as if a user logs in at www.otca.com.au, and then visits otca.com.au (no www.), the login is not recognized. This is because the cookie is assigned with a domain of www.otca.com.au which a browser will not send to otca.com.au. However, the reverse works fine (logging in at otca.com.au and then visiting www.otca.com.au). The fix is to hard set the cookie's domain to otca.com.au regardless of the hostname entered by the user. Alternatively, a mod_rewrite rule to make sure that all users access the site at the same domain would solve it, but I'm getting ahead of myself

[kurdt_the_goat]

I should have expected that shouldn't i! Actually my own use of subdomains is limited to a few sites mostly on client request, but now that you mention it, they all fit into your 'subdomain regime' anyway I guess my personal opinion is skewed from the designer POV, i'm only concerned about looks

So i guess you're saying we need to know what Griffin's intended use is before offering up which is the better solution!