Does it make any difference for indexing?

[Yauhen]

In the html code of a page I can link to my other pages in two different ways
either
http://www.domainnaim.com/page.html
or just
page.html

Both variants work fine. The question is: Does it make any difference for SEs when indexing my pages if I use the former or the latter variant? Will my pages get indexed faster if I use either of these variants?

[Surfn]

no one or nothing would see page.html. In order to be viewed if it were not tied to the end of a URL like your first example it would have to be index.(whatever) and in it's own folder.

[Yauhen]

Exactly, Surfn. What I'm talking about is the situation, when: page.html is in the same folder with index.html.

[Surfn]

Exactly, Surfn. What I'm talking about is the situation, when: page.html is in the same folder with index.html.If they are linked then yes. :)

Example: You build a gallery the sponsor links are linked to an FPA. Then both would be indexed.

Hint: use keywords to name the FPA ;)

[Bill]

You are talking about absolute versus relative links.

You'll hear differing opinions.

I figure a mix of absolute and relative links is the best solution, so I tend to use both.

[Yauhen]

Thanks Bill. That's what I was trying to find out. As far as I understand, there's no clear idea of which, relative or absolute, are better for indexing.
The reason I ask this question is that after I changed it all at my site from absolute to relative links (which are a better idea for working offline) I started to notice that my pages get indexed much slower than they used to.
I often change text at some of my pages to experiment in SEO. Now I see that my old text is in Yahoo index for quite a long time, though, generally, Yahoo'd already have indexed the pages with new text by this time, if I had absolute links. At least, it looks like that.