Re: Fwd: Bug#642391: dillo: sane default for http redirects [origin: [email protected]]

Rogutės wrote:
> Benjamin Johnson (2011-09-22 14:47):
> > On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:18:21 -0400, Axel Beckert
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >this bug report came in for dillo 3.0 in Debian Unstable/Testing, see
> > >also http://bugs.debian.org/642391
> > >
> > >See below for my thoughts.
> > >
> > > ... snip...
> > >
> > >Until now I noticed the effects of filter_auto_requests just for
> > >images and was quite happy with it. But with images you can click on
> > >them and they will be loaded. This does not seem to work for
> > >cross-domain redirects. And as annoying as URL shorteners are, I
> > >usually do like to follow those redirects.
> > >
> > >Is it possible to separate the settings for images and redirects? Or
> > >is it possible to allow those redirect on a case-by-case base?
> > >
> > >One easy way to do so would to display the content of the redirect
> > >page which usually contains a link to the redirect target.
> > >
> > >		Kind regards, Axel
> > 
> > You know, this may be the first time I've agreed with one of
> > Debian's patches.  Dillo's default setting breaks many major web
> > sites, including Wikipedia, Google Images, and every photo hosting
> > site.  This hurts Dillo's usability, particularly for new and/or
> > less technically knowledgeable users.  The average user isn't going
> > to stop and think "oh, these images aren't loading because they're
> > hosted on a different domain"; he's going to think "Dillo is broken
> > because this site doesn't work," and probably switch to a different
> > browser.
> > 
> > (Keep in mind, dillo-dev probably represents a small minority of
> > users -- those who are both technically knowledgeable and interested
> > enough to subscribe and participate.  But good software can't be
> > designed just for the minority.  Firefox isn't popular only for its
> > technical merits, but also because it's easy for people to install
> > and use.)
> > 
> > Granted, I like Axel's suggestions -- allow more fine-grained
> > control, and display redirect links.  They're much better than the
> > current all-or-nothing approach.  I'm just saying while we're at it,
> > maybe we should also reconsider Dillo's IMHO overly paranoid
> > defaults.  A lot more people would probably stick with Dillo if it
> > just behaved like they expect it to.
> 
> I, for example, use Firefox with 'permissions.default.image=1', which
> makes it show the link to 3rd party images instead of loading them. The
> only place where I really missed images was Wikipedia, for which I added
> an exception through an add-on.

Once upon a time, back before the filter era, I experimented with something
more fine-grained that understood adblock syntax
http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/pipermail/dillo-dev/2008-December/005573.html
but it wasn't received very positively -- I think due to not being simple
enough.


_______________________________________________
Dillo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev