81–90 of 151 posts
So, here is the thing. Modern browsers (at least Firefox and Chromium, haven't tried the others in a while) have AWESOME autocomplete widgets for their URL bars. They incorporate multiple data sources (URLs and page titles from history, bookmarks, the search engine's keyword autocompletion, probably more), build statistical models (when I start typing "y" I want to go to Youtube 95% of the time, so suggest that first…
I would love autocomplete in URLs I haven’t visited before. Eg my browser should be able to query foo.com for all its available urls and let me search / filter through them via autocomplete. So I could type foo.com/sig And I see/tab through the route for foo.com/sign-in or signup or whatever the server has available. We’d need an agreed endpoint for browsers to query (.well-known/routes?) and some implementations to…
We already have sitemap.xml that could be used for this purpose
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that's because the native widgets haven't changed much So why aren't they updated? If browser makers can't maintain something as simple as a radio button, they will probably not be able to maintain more complex widgets. Browser engines are already so complex that even a giant like Microsoft gave up on maintining one. And Firefox is spending over $200m in software development per year to keep up.
> If browser makers can't maintain something as simple as a radio button, they will probably not be able to maintain more complex widgets. Who said they "can't maintain it"? They just wont, which is different. Besides, it is up to HTMLWG/W3C to expand on those widgets, and they have done nothing... > Browser engines are already so complex that even a giant like Microsoft gave up on maintining one. Not because of them…
It is perfectly maintained as the exact UI element it should be.
So, here is the thing. Modern browsers (at least Firefox and Chromium, haven't tried the others in a while) have AWESOME autocomplete widgets for their URL bars. They incorporate multiple data sources (URLs and page titles from history, bookmarks, the search engine's keyword autocompletion, probably more), build statistical models (when I start typing "y" I want to go to Youtube 95% of the time, so suggest that first…
It's important to note that this set of rules is for use with a small ( > Exact matches always come first. One place this very first rule doesn't work is autocomplete for geocoding. If you are typing "London": - There is a village called Lon, Pakistan [1] - There is also a village called Lond, Pakistan [2] - There are numerous places called Londo all over the world [3] So its necessary to determine that some places a…
It turns out that people in London, England have to type 2 more letters, a task that I am sure is not beyond them.
It's important to note that this set of rules is for use with a small ( > Exact matches always come first. One place this very first rule doesn't work is autocomplete for geocoding. If you are typing "London": - There is a village called Lon, Pakistan [1] - There is also a village called Lond, Pakistan [2] - There are numerous places called Londo all over the world [3] So its necessary to determine that some places a…
I see no reason this doesn’t work for Lon and Lond and London. It turns out that people in London, England have to type 2 more letters, a task that I am sure is not beyond them.
So, here is the thing. Modern browsers (at least Firefox and Chromium, haven't tried the others in a while) have AWESOME autocomplete widgets for their URL bars. They incorporate multiple data sources (URLs and page titles from history, bookmarks, the search engine's keyword autocompletion, probably more), build statistical models (when I start typing "y" I want to go to Youtube 95% of the time, so suggest that first…
Yes, fill the web with keyloggers. It's best for the users.
Someone please let Slack know. I type "@dustin" and see one of five Dustins, the one I want is highlighted, so I press tab and it selects the next Dustin and usually I press "tab enter" to then submit my comment and now I've pinged the wrong person.
It's important to note that this set of rules is for use with a small ( > Exact matches always come first. One place this very first rule doesn't work is autocomplete for geocoding. If you are typing "London": - There is a village called Lon, Pakistan [1] - There is also a village called Lond, Pakistan [2] - There are numerous places called Londo all over the world [3] So its necessary to determine that some places a…
I see no reason this doesn’t work for Lon and Lond and London. It turns out that people in London, England have to type 2 more letters, a task that I am sure is not beyond them.
Together with all the other millions of people that write London around the world.
According to google trends London is searched about 20-30 times more often than Lon.
Sorting Lon before London (in absence of more information) seems a bad choice.