> A better UX solution to this problem would be coming up with a way to detect pages that do not seem legitimate
Easier said than done.
Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
11–20 of 69 posts
Re: Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
#12I still think this is terrible. It flies against the principles of HATEOS, we have a design idiom that web developers /should/ be following to show us precisely where we are and what is happening in a website, why would we want to lose all of that information.
I would be very unhappy if they removed the option to disable this from chrome, almost to the point that I'd consider changing browsers (and I like chrome...)
(sorry about that)
Re: Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
#13> The URL is still accessible in iOS by tapping the URL bar, or in the Canary experiment by clicking the origin chip or hitting ⌘-L.[0]
I honestly don't see what the big deal is. So, you have to click the origin chip to modify or share the URL. There's even a handy keyboard shortcut. What am I missing?
The examples in the link[0] show that it's actually beneficial.
Re: Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
#14The path and query parts of the URL my address bar is /item?id=7694968 . To the server, it's vitally important (as is the cookie). Especially to the average user, it's complete noise.
Some path components are not made for humans, but many are.
I regularly type in twitter.com/ and a user name or apple.com/ and a product. Or on GitHub I'll change the page number in the URL to advance 10 pages.
Also, domain names can be just as noisy with subdomains.
How do you define an average user anyhow? I think there's only more common use cases. Everyone has their special needs and uses on the internet.
Re: Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
#15I still think this is terrible. It flies against the principles of HATEOS, we have a design idiom that web developers /should/ be following to show us precisely where we are and what is happening in a website, why would we want to lose all of that information. I would be very unhappy if they removed the option to disable this from chrome, almost to the point that I'd consider changing browsers (and I like chrome...)…
> why would we want to lose all of that information.
Because the url past the domain name is not for the user to be messing with most of the time. We the developers control everything to right of the first single slash. Maybe if it was hidden then it would force us to do a better job showing the users where they are in our sites with breadcrumbs and menus and at the same time keep them from trying to poke around in places where they shouldn't be. I think this is a perfect opportunity to open up our minds and build better UI inside the frame.
Re: Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
So then a SHARE button in the browser exposing the URL would accomplish all the goals you listed.
Aha, by that logic, they then hide the SHARE button, but introduce new SHOW SHARE BUTTON button.
Admittedly the "hiding functionality" kick that developers seem to be on these days is starting to get rather grating...
Re: Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
#17I actually disagree with the blog. I don't work for Google but I think my parents would be better served with just knowing which domain name they're on rather than having to parse through a huge url.
Re: Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
#18I actually disagree with the blog. I don't work for Google but I think my parents would be better served with just knowing which domain name they're on rather than having to parse through a huge url.
If that was the case, then emphasizing the domain name within the url would address their needs, while preserving the full url for anyone who needs/wants it. I'm looking at Firefox's url bar as I type this, and the url text is all medium grey except for ycombinator.com, which is black. There is absolutely no confusion about what site I'm on, and no need to parse through a huge url.
Re: Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
#19What's wrong with bolding or otherwise emphasizing the TLD plus one more level of the domain? I wouldn't even mind (I would, but I'd get used to it) the url bar showing com.ycombinator.news/item?id=7694967 to avoid super long subdomains obscuring the main domain. But forcing a click to show the full uri? That's going to eat up a lot of aggregate developer time.
It also does nothing to address a major problem: companies using alternate domains for their services. It does me no good to know what the real domain is without any other distracting information, if I can't tell whether than real domain is trustworthy. The browser would have to maintain a map of trusted organizations and domains they're known to use, and show the trusted official domain in place of other domains. Which is problematic for several reasons (not the least is the effort required to maintain such a list), and could lead to additional security problems in edge cases (domains transferred to new owners, etc).
Re: Chrome's experiment of hiding the URL is awful
#20I agree, it's awful. URLs are the central concept in the web. People should be aware that they are browsing certain URL at the moment. Be able to exchange links.
So then a SHARE button in the browser exposing the URL would accomplish all the goals you listed.
You don't even need a share button. You just click on the domain thing instead of the search area and it works exactly like before.