Suggested practise when mentioning the link to an Apple Support document

Question

There's often an Apple Support/Knowledge base document that discusses a particular feature or answer to a common user query. I and many other users reference the link to the document in our answers.

I am wondering if it's a good practise to include the link as it is or should the title be provided as part of the link? For example, the Apple Support document discussing the Sidecar feature present in macOS Catalina and iPadOS 13 can linked to like this:

• https://support.apple.com/kb/HT210380

or like this:

• Use your iPad as a second display for your Mac with Sidecar

I have taken the latter approach for a long time as I think it's descriptive to include the title to the document. However, I have often noticed many experienced users taking the former approach of not including the document title as a part of the link.

I wonder if those users are not including the title as the title may be liable to change?

I am trying to compare between the two and follow a consistent approach moving forward.

Answer 1

I do tend to hide the link behind the page title, but I preface it thus

Apple KB - Use your iPad as a second display for your Mac with Sidecar

One thing I also do - this has been tested over time - is remove the 'location code' entirely, so rather than
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210380
or even
https://support.apple.com/kb/HT210380
I will reduce it to
https://support.apple.com/HT210380

as this seems to cause fewer issues on international pages.

I imagine doing this from a phone is considerably more troublesome.

After comments
I agree with both bmike & Allan's answers too, essentially that form follows function.
For instance,

You need to modulate your flanging sprocket using a dilithium crystal meta-damper - see https://support.apple.com/HT210380 for more info on calibrating your sprocket.

rather than

You need to do this first - https://support.apple.com/HT210380

or even

You need to do this - Apple KB - Calibrating your Flanging Sprocket - then you can dampen your crystals.

which is less than useless.
So, the first is explanation plus more detail on one more difficult aspect, second is just an irritating link-only, third only covers half an answer & forces the reader to click through to even get that half.

Answer 2

I am a heavy proponent of not hiding the link so I author my articles always to show the URL and KB and will append a quick summary or copy the title based on how pretty I feel that link should be.

I will almost never do the second where the KB is invisible when reading. The “descriptive” I prioritize is knowing the Apple link / KB and not the narrative since I expect to explain in context why I feel the article is meaningful.

But, this is my preference and experience. I get others might have different priority or aesthetics.

Answer 3

For me, the 'authority' of the link is important, and I'm more likely to accept information from a support.apple URL than 'hot.osx.skillz.biz'.

While that info can be gleaned from a mouse-over, having it visible, in some format, is my preference.

Answer 4

I tend to “prettify” links instead of having just the raw URL and this goes for not just Apple Support Documents, but articles, papers, etc. But, there are occasions where the raw URL is necessary.

Some Examples

• Ask Different: See the existing question/answer Where is the list of canonical questions stored for Ask Different?

• Apple Support: I have a couple of different ways to do this

  • Use the whole title - “...see the Apple Support Document How to use safe mode on your Mac“
  • Simplify the title - “... boot into Safe Mode to blah blah blah...”
• Articles, blog posts, etc: iFixit.com has an excellent step-by-step guide on how to replace the hard drive
• Sometimes the raw URL is definitely needed: “You should leave feedback at https://apple.com/feedback

Bottom line, this is up to the author. For links, go with what you’re most comfortable with that fits your writing style.