21–30 of 37 posts
Previous discussion for background: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1704173
This guy totally called it: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1704293 :)
I really hope this appeal gains some traction. Pinning and jump-lists should be seen as Windows 7 features, not IE9 features (which runs on Vista too).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, I wasn't more clear. I meant the browser feature, not the specific implementation. I think the idea in the article was fantastic, and would be much cleaner for developers.
Why was this voted down so harshly?
Why would the existence of this feature lead to a remote compromise? The specific implementation maybe, but the idea??
It'd be much better if MS were to just take a page outline (from all the headlines) that were links and make their menu out of that. Or, look at the HTML5 elements. Then IE9 users might actually see it in use once in a blue moon.
I'd put the odds of this feature even being used by most web developers at about 10%. If no other browser supports it, what's the point? It'd be much better if MS were to just take a page outline (from all the headlines) that were links and make their menu out of that. Or, look at the HTML5 elements. Then IE9 users might actually see it in use once in a blue moon.
It's still worth investigating doing it right, instead of letting IE define the standard, and letting it stagnate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why was this voted down so harshly?
It didn't deserve -1, but I guess it was downvoted because it's wrong? Why would the existence of this feature lead to a remote compromise? The specific implementation maybe, but the idea??
The idea of a website being able to inject things into the task bar menu seems like it would open the door for injecting things that overflow buffers, call other code, etc. What is the security model for that code? What are the limits on what the URL can point to, etc.
It's not like the IE team has a stellar record for this kind of stuff?
I mostly agree, with the exception of two things: 1) It's much easier to stick meta tags in HTML than it is to reference an external file in many cases (blog hosting services, hosted storefronts, etc). 2) Sites that make the best use of that menu will have different data depending on what page is pinned. We didn't do much implementation, but assuming enough people used IE9 we'd probably make that set of meta tags pag…
And even gzipped, 260B * 1M pageviews/day is ~ 1GB a month. Plus the memory to hold the text, the CPU to compress it, versus serving a static file from Apache to the fraction of users the ask for it? Still sounds like a win.
Maybe make it even more like stylesheets: embeddable in the page or linkable to another page.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why was this voted down so harshly?
It didn't deserve -1, but I guess it was downvoted because it's wrong? Why would the existence of this feature lead to a remote compromise? The specific implementation maybe, but the idea??
All of those risks are present for PDFs or png images. If the browser's XML parser is vulnerable, having this feature additionally available won't make and difference.
I have to agree with this article in that there is FAR too much text being added to the webpage for this functionality. Separating it out into a separate file is the way to go. You know, like CSS already does.
I wonder what the trade off is for 1KB of text or an extra HTTP request.
Maybe I'm just out of touch, but does anyone actually use the pinned menu? If no, does it matter how Microsoft decides to implement this? It seems like it's a feature roughly on the importance level of their web snippets feature; that is, not very important at all.