The “discussion/planned feature” is effectively asking for a the 5char code to point to a filename in a user’s cloud. If file owner changes contents of file anyone reaching the file by the link will see just the latest content. Had this feature existed that would largely address my concerns. A down side to link to a file name proposal is consumers of the url no longer have historical record. if one keeps a journal (or library) of the rides you have completed and/or plan to do then that journal is going to be the 5 char code along with a few sentence description. The accuracy of your journal is now at risk. The file author file can change or even delete the source file and the journal entry for the ride executed last month now longer represents what you actually did. If the author deletes their file there goes your history too. Whereas change I proposed history and journaling is both supported and made easier because the system would not needlessly generate a new share code when a new code was not needed. I think both change ideas have merit and the issue is they should not be called the same thing. I feel a new class of share code should be created so that we have one called “share code to a route” the other “share code to a filename”