[rayiner]

Wikipedia disagrees:

> In computing, a hyperlink, or simply a link, is a reference to data that the reader can directly follow either by clicking, tapping, or hovering. A hyperlink points to a whole document or to a specific element within a document. Hypertext is text with hyperlinks. The text that is linked from is called anchor text. A software system that is used for viewing and creating hypertext is a hypertext system, and to create a hyperlink is to hyperlink (or simply to link). A user following hyperlinks is said to navigate or browse the hypertext.

The URL in the abstract is not a "link." A link is an element in hypertext.

[always_good]

You're just being stubborn. Link is used to mean a URL by the layperson. For example, I don't think I've ever heard my family say "URL" in their life.

[ozzmotik]

a "link" is something that connects two entities together in some arbitrary way. a chain link for instance connects the constituent entities of a chain (other links) together. a link in a linked list connects different nodes together. and a hypertext link connects two hypertext resources together. what you're doing is picking one specific definition and applying it liberally to all potential interpretations and contexts of said word. this is why i tend to espouse the virtues of generality over specificity; when you get too specific, you start eliminating the actual utility and flexibility of language. a link in terms of computing is most certainly NOT just a hypertext link, that is only one very specific interpretation of the concept at hand that you're falling back on to try and further your argument. liberally ignoring all the other possible interpretations is quite intellectually dishonest imo. still, you're entitled to perceive things how you want and argue it whatever way you desire. just know that the majority of reasonable and educated individuals will disagree with you. you're up shit creek and you keep denying every paddle that's offered to ya m8

[oarsinsync]

If it helps, the Oxford English dictionary has updated the definition of “literally” to literally include “used for emphasis while not being literally true.”

Whether we like it or not, language evolves. If “literally” can, then literally any other word can too.

[jakeogh]

"wikipedia disagrees" like it's a source?