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

Make Firefox support moz://a

bugzilla.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–176 of 176 posts

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#171

Post by xg15 »

andrei_says_ wrote: post #116
toxican wrote: post #42

While I don't like the branding move at all, I think the concern that people will start calling them moz-colon-forward-slash-forwadslash-a is a little ridiculous. Is Sony's line of laptops Analog Wave One Zero? Is Verizon Verizoncheckmark? Is Johnson & Johnson Johnson ampersand Johnson? Is Comcast CComcast? No, because people aren't complete idiots. Those that are going to know/care about Mozilla will be able to tell…

Seems like you conflate idiocy with pre-existing exposure to a brand's proper spelling. While I see the value of this sentiment, the brands you mentioned have branding efforts that so far overspend mozilla's that the comparison is barely relevant. Also, typing www.mo://a.org in a browser presents a serious problem.

Full stops are allowed in schemes, so technically "www.moz" is a valid scheme name...

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#172

Post by xg15 »

On some level, this starts to look like a really silly one-up/who-can-violate-the-spirit-of-uris-the-most contest.

So Google got its own TLD just for marketing purposes?

Well, Mozilla got its own scheme for marketing purposes only!

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#173

Post by rdiddly »

toxican wrote: post #120
devopsproject wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is better than "Mozzarella" or "Fox Fire" which I have heard numerous times

My mother still calls it Fox Fire and Newegg, "Egghead", although I think it's mostly to annoy me. It doesn't though, but I let her think it does because it's funny.

Yes but what is ne and what is a wegg?

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#174

Post by jaclaz »

adam12 wrote: post #110
Jordrok wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, people will almost definitely not call them "moz-colon-forward-slash-forwadslash-a", but I could easily see a lot of people shortening the whole thing to just Moz. The :// in a url acts as a separator, so the important bits are whatever come before and after it. All there is after it is an "a" which isn't very informative, so my eyes are drawn to "moz" instead. Which isn't ideal because a company named Moz alre…

It took me until your post to see that : = i and // = ll. I've known the Mozilla name for years. I guess I'm just too accustomed to seeing http:// . edit: Maybe other people see haiti's pill.

I am definitely old school, but if this (IMHO senseless) idea of reading "://" as "ill" would go on, a few sites might be read "the wrong way", as an example ;) silly combinator:

https://ycombinator.com

and silly ahoo.com:

https://yahoo.com

No, wait, the latter one doesn't sound too bad...

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#175

Post by datenwolf »

gkya wrote: post #73
datenwolf wrote: post #23

Until now I didn't realize Mozilla changed their logo. Now I've seen it the typographer in me cries… The whole purpose of text is to _unambigously_ convey information. So either Mozilla now rebrands themself as moz-colon-slash-slash or they now live with a significant portion of typography-anal nerds who dislike that logo.

> The whole purpose of text is to _unambigously_ convey information. The purpose of text is to convey information, ambiguously or not. Text is a coherent and cohesive group of one or more sentences. A logo is not text, it is a graphic that represents an establishment or a brand. It may include some text, but it is as text as a photo of a road sign with some text on it is.

> Text is a coherent and cohesive group of one or more sentences

That would be prose¹ (and to some degree poetry).

Text² is an object that can be read. And by that definition…

> A logo is not text

… yes, a logo can be text.

----

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prose 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text_(literary_theory)

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#176

Post by gkya »

datenwolf wrote: post #175
gkya wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The whole purpose of text is to _unambigously_ convey information. The purpose of text is to convey information, ambiguously or not. Text is a coherent and cohesive group of one or more sentences. A logo is not text, it is a graphic that represents an establishment or a brand. It may include some text, but it is as text as a photo of a road sign with some text on it is.

> Text is a coherent and cohesive group of one or more sentences That would be prose¹ (and to some degree poetry). Text² is an object that can be read. And by that definition… > A logo is not text … yes, a logo can be text. ---- 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prose 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text_(literary_theory)

Read better into your wikipedia articles. This is how your #2 continues:

> It is a coherent set of signs that transmits some kind of informative message.

Post reply on HN