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

Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

chromestory.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 332 posts

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#231

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

degenerate wrote: post #224
muthdra wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, it seems like the you click on Google Search has the right href (which is what appears on the status text) but it also has a ping attribute to it for tracking. https://www.w3schools.com/tags/att_a_ping.asp

I'm surprised there is not a chrome extension to remove these.

I'm not surprised at all. Fortunately we still have Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/google-no-tra...

Edit: it seems to remove ping, but the onmousedown event is still there.

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#232

Post by gioele »

will_pseudonym wrote: post #108
afandian wrote: post #97

Something open, standardized, quite similar and already working is Web annotations. This includes 'robust anchoring' capability which could surely be used to solve this problem. https://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/ Hypothes.is is a well established open implementation.

https://web.hypothes.is/ is the URL parent was referring to, but there was a typo. This looks similar to Genius.com's annotations. I wonder how this will evolve with multiple providers allowing similar functionality. Ideally you'd be able to combine annotation networks for a single URI to get all possible annotations you want on a given page. Problems with these types of systems are the same as product reviews like o…

> https://web.hypothes.is/ is the URL parent was referring to, but there was a typo.

> This looks similar to Genius.com's annotations

» At least one member of the Hypothesis team came from Genius (formerly Rap Genius) which is the largest annotation service on the web.« https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13739965

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#233

Post by giornogiovanna »

ajkjk wrote: post #25

I love this, or at least the general idea that it represents, though the specific implementation might be a little odd. (I'd rather the link to be some sort of 'coordinate' -- like a CSS selector, but for text?)

Something like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19169582 ?

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#234

Post by vntok »

degenerate wrote: post #224
muthdra wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, it seems like the you click on Google Search has the right href (which is what appears on the status text) but it also has a ping attribute to it for tracking. https://www.w3schools.com/tags/att_a_ping.asp

I'm surprised there is not a chrome extension to remove these.

Nobody cares, really, except for a percent fringe users of a percent of Google users.

On a more general point, once again Google Search is provided to you for free. If you don't want to use it by their rules, you are entirely free to use Bing or Yahoo. Actually using the service regularly, because it is tailored to your workflow and provides value to you, while complaining that the tailored/value-adding part is driven by an analysis of your behaviour on the servicee... that's very hypocritical.

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#235

Post by coldtea »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #218
coldtea wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't use it because they were "poorly written", it was a "state of the art" technique back in the day. Gmail used, others used it. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/15238391/hash-params-vs-...

sure, it was state of the art back in the day, but state of the art over time depreciates to technical debt, and the ones that are left using what was once state of the art are now poorly written.

>and the ones that are left using what was once state of the art are now poorly written.

They could just be perfectly written (for their time), just legacy and not updated, is my distinction.

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#236

Post by giornogiovanna »

amichal wrote: post #228
giornogiovanna wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of (mostly free) hosting just serves the files you upload, so that wouldn't work unless you copied the files to be served at every possible route.

“#” Fragments aren’t sent to the server at all. They are ONLY used to get to a specific anchor (old school) or processed by JavaScript to do something (often fake navigation by showing and hiding content). This article is adding a 3rd magic use for them.

Yeah, I know. Parent was saying that the History API doesn't need any server support, because you can just serve the same file no matter what the subpath, but my point is that lots of servers don't even have support for that. That's why the fragment is still more useful than the History API in some cases.

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#237

Post by degenerate »

vntok wrote: post #234
degenerate wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised there is not a chrome extension to remove these.

Nobody cares, really, except for a percent fringe users of a percent of Google users. On a more general point, once again Google Search is provided to you for free. If you don't want to use it by their rules, you are entirely free to use Bing or Yahoo. Actually using the service regularly, because it is tailored to your workflow and provides value to you, while complaining that the tailored/value-adding part is drive…

I don't use Google, I use StartPage. I am plainly stating that I am surprised nobody made an extension to remove the ping= link attribute from all webpages, considering that the only reason it exists is to track user activity.

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#238

Post by csarven »

gioele wrote: post #230

Why aren't XPointer/XPath fragments used instead of yet another half-backed reimplementation of the same concept? XPointer and XPath have been ratified by the W3C in (...checks...) 2003. They have since been revised, slimmed down and used in countless XML-based applications and specs. The cool thing about XPointer is that it is basically impossible that its fragments are already used in the target document. No site w…

XPointer is one of options for a fragment selector in W3C Reference Note on Selectors and States: https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-states/

See also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19169582

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#239

Post by csarven »

ipsum2 wrote: post #3

I can't find an RFC about this, but it looks like something similar has been proposed in the past, with a slightly different API. > In URIs for MIME text/plain documents RFC 5147 specifies a fragment identifier for the character and line positions and ranges within the document using the keywords "char" and "line". Some popular browsers do not yet support RFC 5147.[5] The following example identifies lines 11 through…

Right on. Different fragment selectors can be used depending on the media type of a representation: https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-states/#selector

Expanded here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19169582

Re: Chrome will Soon Let You Share Links to a Specific Word or Sentence on a Page

#240

Post by dak1 »

Using the hash for navigation is still quite common, because usage of history pushState requires server support to correctly work on reload.

I’d also argue that SPAs using it for navigation are not abusing it. The purpose is to allow linking to different sections in a document. Navigation is effectively an advanced form of the same concept. It’s just that as you navigate, the DOM happens to mutate to bring the content you linked to into view, instead of just scrolling down to it.

Hash fragments are for page authors to define, not the browser. While this sounds like a useful feature, it’s implementation is simply wrong.

What they really want to do is extend the RFC for URLs to add an additional component. There are already unsafe characters that could be used for this purpose that would be nonbreaking.

For example, add a | at the end of the hash fragment, and anything after that can be for the browser to communicate page state independent of the page author’s intent.

The current proposal, however, should be firmly rejected.

Post reply on HN