Full url in Opera 17. Any chances?

[Deleted User]

Deleted User last edited by

Originally posted by Frenzie:

That actually reminds me of something. Rafael asked why I am "obsessed" with the query string and hash, and I think I sufficiently expressed my astonishment at the very question. Well, I don't know if this bug still exists, but for a while the MyOpera forum would occasionally try to send me to a link like http://my.opera.com/community/forums/findpost.pl?idx=14888352.* Hiding the query string would've made it impossible for me to see at a glance what the problem was and fix it.

That question of Rafael was silly.
Another use case when a full url is very useful/handy is when you want to access some data which sometimes you can't directly from the page you are on. By modifying the string you can access data which you otherwise would have to search for at first and wasting time.
Worked for me more often, except I got an access denied

[frenzie]

frenzie last edited by

Originally posted by serious:

I think Opera12 had the implementation right, option for showing the full address or shortened version and if you click into the address field when having the shortened version it also shows you the _full_ address with protocol and everything.

The lowlighted text has been hard-coded gray since it first showed up in Opera 11. The implementation was better, but definitely not right. By making it only work with a particular color scheme, it's most assuredly broken. It'd actually be less broken if they hard-coded all three colors, but that'd obviously be the worst "solution" to this fairly severe GUI bug.

The simplest fix would be a switch to disable all meddling with the addressbar.

A proper fix which maintains the undesired behavior of lowlighting might check if there's sufficient contrast between the background color and the lowlighted text color. It could perhaps even calculate a lowlighting color on the fly, based on background and text color. A simplified version of this fix would turn off lowlighting when contrast is too low, but that'd just make everyone with a more or less standard color scheme jealous.

Another possible proper fix would implement actual highlighting. As long as it doesn't work with hard-coded text colors, just about anything should be better than the current disaster.

The best solution would be extensive configuration options or an extensive API so one can achieve results similar to Locationbar². Here's all the styling handles it offers:

.textbox-presentation-box 
  .textbox-presentation 
    .textbox-presentation-prePath 
    .textbox-presentation-protocol 
    .textbox-presentation-subdomain 
    .textbox-presentation-domain 
    .textbox-presentation-port 
    .textbox-presentation-path 
    .textbox-presentation-segment-label 
    .textbox-presentation-slash 
    .textbox-presentation-pathFile 
    .textbox-presentation-file 
    .textbox-presentation-query 
    .textbox-presentation-fragment 
  .textbox-overflow-ellipsis

The best solution would of course only be the best when implemented in addition to the simplest fix, or on top of one other other possible fixes. By itself it would be a rather marginal improvement too complicated for most.

[serious]

serious last edited by

Originally posted by Frenzie:

making it only work with a particular color scheme

ok, I dont have such issues as I use the default skin

Originally posted by Frenzie:

The best solution would be extensive configuration options or an extensive API so one can achieve results similar to Locationbar².

+1, best would be for skins or the user directly to be able to style the different url-parts

EDIT: Ps: does Locationbar² allow for eg :focus selector with these attributes?

[frenzie]

frenzie last edited by

Originally posted by serious:

ok, I dont have such issues as I use the default skin

I like the rest of Opera so much that I went for a lighter shade of gray than I used before the Opera 11 addressbar disaster, and on another installation I went with X11 with custom colors instead of desktop integration. But I've been using Opera for many years and have extensively customized my installation; if I were just trying Opera and saw it utterly failing on my custom color scheme—well, let's just say I would not be impressed. Opera 15+ lacks Opera's other redeeming qualities.

By the way, I'm not talking about skins. I'm talking about my operating system or window manager.

Originally posted by serious:

EDIT: Ps: does Locationbar² allow for eg :focus selector with these attributes?

I couldn't say, good question. I'm of course talking about the principle, not the specifics.

[frenzie]

frenzie last edited by

Originally posted by Krake:

Another use case when a full url is very useful/handy is when you want to access some data which sometimes you can't directly from the page you are on. By modifying the string you can access data which you otherwise would have to search for at first and wasting time.

I just realized I've been using this example since they made the forums worse: http://my.opera.com/community/forums/tgr.dml

[A Former User]

A Former User last edited by

Originally posted by Krake:

Originally posted by Frenzie:

That actually reminds me of something. Rafael asked why I am "obsessed" with the query string and hash, and I think I sufficiently expressed my astonishment at the very question. Well, I don't know if this bug still exists, but for a while the MyOpera forum would occasionally try to send me to a link like http://my.opera.com/community/forums/findpost.pl?idx=14888352.* Hiding the query string would've made it impossible for me to see at a glance what the problem was and fix it.

That question of Rafael was silly.
Another use case when a full url is very useful/handy is when you want to access some data which sometimes you can't directly from the page you are on. By modifying the string you can access data which you otherwise would have to search for at first and wasting time.
Worked for me more often, except I got an access denied

My question was not silly. You can check and edit the URL string easily with F8.

[A Former User]

A Former User last edited by

Originally posted by ersi:

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

Originally posted by ersi:

Urls must be correct and I have to be able to verify the correctness before I click or press enter.

That's what the status bar is for.

Indeed, status bar is for that. Now, would you be able to articulate a defence for mangling the url on the status bar as eloquently as you have in case of address field?

Honestly I haven't even noticed the http:// part is trimmed from the floating status bar, when a link leads to a different protocol like a https:// or ftp:// URL it's shown though so there's your way to verify it. The rest of the URL is there...

Originally posted by ersi:

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

As for pressing Enter in that case you obviously already know whether the URL is right or not because you followed it from your bookmarks or pasted the URL yourself and the address field will retain the focus and the text in regular font you can read.

There's more to it. I often enough extract urls from links, for example when noticing that the url is evidently malformed and needs editing to take me to the right place, or when I need to go to a slightly different destination than the url. For this task, the status bar is not enough. The most obvious place for this task is the address field. This is why I care a lot what is going on there.

"I often enough extract urls from links" - if you mean via the "copy link address" command then you pasted it and it'll be displayed fully.
"when I need to go to a slightly different destination than the url" - then I assume the protocol is not important, or are you really in need of pursuing the protocol to go to a sightly different page?

[Deleted User]

Deleted User last edited by

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

Originally posted by ersi:

Now, would you be able to articulate a defence for mangling the url on the status bar as eloquently as you have in case of address field?

Honestly I haven't even noticed the http:// part is trimmed from the floating status bar, when a link leads to a different protocol like a https:// or ftp:// URL it's shown though so there's your way to verify it. The rest of the URL is there...

My question was if you are able to defend any mangling of the url on the status bar, as you are trying to defend the mangling of the address field. Since you offered no defence, I take it that your answer is no. Which is good.

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

"I often enough extract urls from links" - if you mean via the "copy link address" command then you pasted it and it'll be displayed fully.

Hence it's good when the program doesn't mangle it. Which has been my point all along.

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

"when I need to go to a slightly different destination than the url" - then I assume the protocol is not important, or are you really in need of pursuing the protocol to go to a sightly different page?

A case in point:
http://ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/
ftp://ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/

Is the protocol not important there? Absolutely everything is important. Above you said "I haven't even noticed the http:// part is trimmed from the floating status bar, when a link leads to a different protocol like a https:// or ftp:// URL it's shown though". Thus the protocol evidently *is* important. If https, ftp, gopher, etc. must be shown, then there's no justification to remove http either, right?

If you still think that mangling of the urls is justified, then you need to also think exactly how far it is justified, because obviously there's a limit. At least you would notice for example when the address field and status bar were entirely removed, right? So, if a little mangling is okay, think further, how far would you allow it. As for me, I allow no mangling at all. The program must display everything faithfully. There's no reason for it not to.

[serious]

serious last edited by

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

You can check and edit the URL string easily with F8

and previously I could check it easily without doing anything if I wished so.

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

the protocol is not important

It is for me at work. Long story short, we have same addresses running on http or https (eg. depending on host entry to skip the ssl-offloading load balancer) so going to a url without a protocol will (in my chrome experience) in 90% of the time give you exactly the wrong one from the history. Seeing the full url is way easier for debugging and selecting the right one from the address bar autocomplete dropdown.

[A Former User]

A Former User last edited by

Originally posted by ersi:

My question was if you are able to defend any mangling of the url on the status bar

There's no mangling, as I said http:// is hidden but all the others are kept so there's your differentiation. The rest of the URL string is intact in the status bar.

Originally posted by ersi:

If you still think that mangling of the urls is justified, then you need to also think exactly how far it is justified, because obviously there's a limit. At least you would notice for example when the address field and status bar were entirely removed, right? So, if a little mangling is okay, think further, how far would you allow it. As for me, I allow no mangling at all.

The problem with the address field being ENTIRELY removed is that there would be no way to go to any URL and the security information would have to lie elsewhere. But look, this hypothesis you're talking about has nothing to do with the discussion here: URL string trimming.

Originally posted by ersi:

The program must display everything faithfully. There's no reason for it not to.

It does, in the status bar no protocol = http, https:// = https://, and so on. In the address field you've got security information and the full URL with F8.
The reason is readability of the main domain...

Originally posted by ersi:

A case in point:
http://ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/
ftp://ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/

Originally posted by serious:

It is for me at work. Long story short, we have same addresses running on http or https (eg. depending on host entry to skip the ssl-offloading load balancer) so going to a url without a protocol will (in my chrome experience) in 90% of the time give you exactly the wrong one from the history.

Well guys you aways come up with the most obscure examples that regular users will never come to experience or that doesn't make any difference (like the Opera FTP or HTTP pages)... "The company I work on have broken their own intranet/website." kind of examples...

[serious]

serious last edited by

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

regular users

well, that's a thing of definition ... considering opera is a classic power-user app so go figure

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

that doesn't make any difference (like the Opera FTP or HTTP pages)

only in that case, if you access a server that does not only serve static content but runs scripts the difference is quite huge (accessing the file vs executing it)

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

"The company I work on have broken their own intranet/website."

its not broken, but I am working as a tester and need to poke around in the guts of it all here and there.

Edit: anyhow, all we are asking for is to provide the same option that Op12 had: a checkbox that lets you toggle to show the abbreviated or full url by default (or to make it fully styleable by the skin which would be even more awesome)

[Deleted User]

Deleted User last edited by

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

...this hypothesis you're talking about has nothing to do with the discussion here: URL string trimming.

Let's call it trimming then. The change of name doesn't change anything in my arguments against it. What you call trimming is a fact, not a hypothesis. Surely *you* are not talking hypothetically...

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

Originally posted by ersi:

The program must display everything faithfully...

It does, in the status bar no protocol = http, https:// = https://, and so on. In the address field you've got security information and the full URL with F8.
The reason is readability of the main domain...

The reason is not only flimsy, but also wrong. If the protocol name takes away readability from the domain name, is it just http that does so? Not at all. So, all protocols are equal here.

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

Well guys you aways come up with the most obscure examples that regular users will never come to experience or that doesn't make any difference (like the Opera FTP or HTTP pages)... "The company I work on have broken their own intranet/website." kind of examples...

Looks like you have no concept of internet as a tool - a major part of it being intranet when in work environment. In both nets, a browser is a tool that must work or another tool will be chosen, plain and simple. It would also do good to you to have a concept of web-developing or office work done for a living. These are serious concepts for you to get a grasp of. When you look around even in these forums, you'll see there's nothing obscure about these things.

[frenzie]

frenzie last edited by

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

My question was not silly. You can check and edit the URL string easily with F8.

Indeed, it was more than silly. Silly would be to suggest one write an extension to display a full addressbar underneath the addressbar. Suggesting one press F8 constantly is beyond silly. It fits a pattern, of course.

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

or are you really in need of pursuing the protocol to go to a sightly different page?

It's not like this came up recently or anything.

http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/show.dml/109458842?startidx=200#comment112867522
http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/show.dml/109458842?startidx=200#comment112870972
http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/show.dml/109458842?startidx=200#comment112875252
http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/show.dml/109458842?startidx=200#comment112884802
http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/show.dml/109458842?startidx=250#comment112899952

I've already typed a different address from the addressbar while I was on one of the opera:// pages, only to end up on opera://whatever.com doesn't exist. Hiding the protocol is broken. Hard-coded text colors are broken. Hiding the query string and hash makes the browser appear broken in many circumstances because it's not clear that a different page is actually being loaded, nor that jumping will occur due to the presence of a hash. And in any case, having to press keys constantly on a device meant for automation of meaningless tasks is broken.

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

The problem with the address field being ENTIRELY removed is that there would be no way to go to any URL and the security information would have to lie elsewhere. But look, this hypothesis you're talking about has nothing to do with the discussion here: URL string trimming.

Sure there is. Just press F2, or change how F8 works. The Ctrl+F dialog might serve as an example.

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

Well guys you aways come up with the most obscure examples that regular users will never come to experience or that doesn't make any difference (like the Opera FTP or HTTP pages)... "The company I work on have broken their own intranet/website." kind of examples...

It's not broken. But even if it were, you keep claiming Blink is so much better than Presto in the website compatibility department. Why would you want to take away part of that alleged advantage?

Originally posted by serious:

Edit: anyhow, all we are asking for is to provide the same option that Op12 had: a checkbox that lets you toggle to show the abbreviated or full url by default (or to make it fully styleable by the skin which would be even more awesome)

Not me, I want more. Like I keep saying, the hard-coded text color is a broken disaster, and a shining example of the very worst kind of UX: that which doesn't take the user into account, but only some designer's personal preferences.

[serious]

serious last edited by

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Not me, I want more.

as I said ...

Originally posted by serious:

(or to make it fully styleable by the skin which would be even more awesome)

[frenzie]

frenzie last edited by

Originally posted by serious:

as I said ...

Originally posted by serious:

(or to make it fully styleable by the skin which would be even more awesome)

Sure, but I'd already be satisfied with just the appropriate text color taken from the OS, just so it wouldn't be broken. Most important, a non-broken implementation shouldn't require any action on my end at all. I'm incredibly patient with Opera, but some random Firefox user checking it out will not be. They'll just see it doesn't even integrate with their dark color scheme and Opera will be gone as quickly as it came.

[A Former User]

A Former User last edited by

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Just press F2

He meant to ask what I'd think if there wasn't a address field anywhere like as if that was just one higher level of URL trimming which is not, which is why I answered the way I did... (And because there's no F2 in Opera anymore.)

Originally posted by ersi:

If the protocol name takes away readability from the domain name, is it just http that does so? Not at all. So, all protocols are equal here.

You're mixing two things (having the full URL visible 100% of the time or trimmed, and, checking the target of a link).

Originally posted by serious:

Edit: anyhow, all we are asking for is to provide the same option that Op12 had: a checkbox that lets you toggle to show the abbreviated or full url by default (or to make it fully styleable by the skin which would be even more awesome)

Well it was pretty much confirmed by Blazej that the option is coming.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User last edited by

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

You're mixing two things (having the full URL visible 100% of the time or trimmed, and, checking the target of a link).

No, I'm not mixing them. The trend of trimming urls in the address field makes you think that address field is as if somehow not for checking the target of your current webpage, but alas, address field is also for that, among other things. Think for a moment: Having the url visible 100% of the time *for what reason*? Checking the address of course. What else?

Address field always was exactly for checking of the current address, i.e. the target of the current webpage, until the trimming began. There's no reason for trimming to be there at all, it certainly should not be forced upon people, the way it is right now in Chropera.

[frenzie]

frenzie last edited by

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

Well it was pretty much confirmed by Blazej that the option is coming.

Great news! :cheers:

[Deleted User]

Deleted User last edited by

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

Well it was pretty much confirmed by Blazej that the option is coming.

Great news! :cheers:

Wait for half a year for it to materialise too, like people do with bookmarks

Seriously, now that they are killing the entire community, the message of the company is clear: Get lost. We need users, not fans http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/important-announcement-about-your-my-opera-account

What kind of users will a company have who buried their own fan base?

[frenzie]

frenzie last edited by

Originally posted by ersi:

Wait for half a year for it to materialise too, like people do with bookmarks

As long as it's there when Linux support materializes in two years.