Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

bugs.chromium.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 919 posts

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#351

Post by warent »

Nadya wrote: post #300
trocadero wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> http://pool.ntp.org/ takes me to an "It works!" default Apache 2 page for an Ubuntu installation. As the comment in the issue describes, http://pool.ntp.org/ takes you to a random ntp server. Either way, the ask was for a difference in www.example.com vs example.com. Not a difference in www.pool.example.com vs pool.example.com. In the latter case, the different subdomains will still be shown (AFAIK). >Even if you u…

>In the latter case, the different subdomains will still be shown (AFAIK). http://www.pool.example.com displays as http://pool.example.com Here's a gif: https://vgy.me/61I0DA.gif For fun I'm going to set up a www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www record. http://www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.example.com shows as example.com E: I'll add it to my certs later but I did it: https://www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.…

Re: E2 (http://www.example.www.example.org === example.example.org)

I just found the same thing. How exactly is this a feature? What an insane decision.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#352

Post by ezequiel-garzon »

Whether "we" like it or not, URLs are increasingly becoming a rare techy term. It is no wonder the average user has a problem with URLs with the advent of omnibars. I for one can't sometimes "force" Chrome to go to domain.com instead of searching that expression. Oh, and try to view the full URL you're accessing on your iPhone, particularly if you're GETting something other than /.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#354

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

gsnedders wrote: post #203
Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true unless the cookie is specifically marked to be domain-wide. There was a time when IE misbehaved. Not sure if this fixed in Edge: https://www.mxsasha.eu/blog/2014/03/04/definitive-guide-to-c...

> There was a time when IE misbehaved. Not sure if this fixed in Edge: https://www.mxsasha.eu/blog/2014/03/04/definitive-guide-to-c... . Pretty sure that was fixed in Edge and IE (as a security issue).

While that certainly may be the case, it's been shown time and time again how many users (and even sys admins!) are bad at installing patches.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#355

Post by px1999 »

vntok wrote: post #321
majewsky wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because there is a huge difference between those two: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada

If the browser absolutely 100% of the time knew that difference and showed "Wikipedia FR > Canada", wouldn't it be much simpler for the average user? The browser could even show specialized UI such as "FR" as a clickable dropdown menu to allow users to switch languages. Chrome already does this for searching a single website through the address bar (type domain.com TAB) Basically these changes are not thought for you…

Maybe it could show "Canada - Wikipedia" like the page authors intended as a title. Maybe if the page authors want to have links between languages, they could code that in a standard markup language themselves.

These aren't decisions for a useragent to make, and there aren't enough browsers out there that people have a reasonable choice.

Bastardising the url isn't a solution to anything, it's a step towards something that Google, not users, want (in making AMP "trivial").

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#356

Post by crazygringo »

Safari already hides "www.". In fact it hides everything except the root-level domain, e.g. "https://www.google.com/about/" shows just "[lock] google.com".

Firefox and Opera show the full domain but gray out everything in the entire URL except the root-level domain, so "www." is gray.

Just saying, de-emphasizing and hiding parts of the URL is clearly a trend. This isn't just a Google thing.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#357

Post by dbbk »

drb91 wrote: post #229
jwr wrote: post #30

This is idiotic and harmful. We already lost information about the protocol, because somebody believed it is "too complex" for users. Now we're losing other parts of the URL. It's making a joke of the SSL/TLS padlock, too — what exactly is the padlock supposed to tell me? It used to signify that a "known authority" certified that I'm connected to whatever I see in the URL bar. But now that browsers take liberties wit…

How do you verify the authority owns the content? For instance: AMP urls serve content from a different authority than the one that produces the content.

Google wants to introduce Web Packaging to solve this: https://youtu.be/pr5cIRruBsc?t=543

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#358

Post by paulddraper »

trocadero wrote: post #173
parliament32 wrote: post #118

Considering a subdomain "trivial" is ridiculous... there's a difference between "www.example.com" and "example.com". Not only can they serve different sites, they can even have different DNS records! It seems that "m." is also considered a trivial subdomain. So when a user clicks a link to a "m.facebook.com" uri, they'll be confused why FB looks different when the browser reports it's on "facebook.com". I sincerely h…

>there's a difference between "www.example.com" and "example.com" Can you link to a site where these two are different?

See the issue.

http://www.pool.ntp.org/ http://pool.ntp.org/

https://www.citibank.com.sg/ https://citibank.com.sg/

Plus, this actually removes any www part of the domain.

So subdomain.www.example.com shows as subdomain.example.com

Why even open that can of worms?

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#359

Post by kccqzy »

derefr wrote: post #295
ehsankia wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook aside, don't the majority of sites show you mobile version by looking at headers. Isn't that the whole reason the "Show desktop version" feature even exists in Chrome, to send the desktop header? Very few sites actually use www. vs m. Clearly, in those cases, people aren't "confused" by the fact that they are seeing a mobile version on www., so other than the fact that you're used to Facebook specifically wo…

> Isn't that the whole reason the "Show desktop version" feature even exists in Chrome, to send the desktop header? This is indeed what it does; I wish it did more! Specifically, when visiting responsive pages on a phone where the mobile-viewport-size layout is just 100% broken, I’d love if “Request Desktop Site” actually set the viewport to be that of a desktop browser, and then set a low CSS/viewport zoom level to…

I have a bookmarklet to specifically add/edit the tag on the page to change the viewport width to 1200px.

Works in many cases, although there still are sites that break with this. I have seen sites that uses the value of window.innerWidth at load and never bother listening for changes in the width. I have seen sites that uses the presence of onTouchMove event to determine whether to use a mobile layout.

Post reply on HN