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

171–180 of 332 posts

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

#171

Post by fxfan »

xg15 wrote: post #109

Technical question, apart from the (valid IMO) political arguments: Google's idea to implement this is to append the text fragment to the URL in a "#targetText" pseudo-query-argument in the URL fragment part. This sounds like it would extremely easily break existing web pages who use the fragment part for their own state. In the blog post, there doesn't seem to be anything addressing this (or even just specifying how…

> We'll just completely change the commonly understand processing model of fragment identifiers, but it'll be fine since we don't think anyone is using them anyway...

That's not true. Truth is:

> We'll just completely change the commonly understand processing model of fragment identifiers, it may not be fine, but can you really stop us?

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

#172

Post by westurner »

csarven wrote: post #140

I would like to urge the browser developers/makers to adopt existing proposals which came through open consensus which do precisely cover the same use cases (and more!) W3C Reference Note on Selectors and States: https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-states/ It is part of the suite of specs that came through the W3C Web Annotation Working Group: https://www.w3.org/annotation/ More examples in W3C Note Embedding Web Annotat…

"Integration with W3C Web Annotations" https://github.com/bokand/ScrollToTextFragment/issues/4

> It would be great to be able to comment on the linked resource text fragment. W3C Web Annotations [implementations] don't recognize the targetText parameter, so AFAIU comments are then added to the document#fragment and not the specified text fragment. [...]

> Is there a simplified mapping of W3C Web Annotations to URI fragment parameters?

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

#173

Post by kreetx »

csarven wrote: post #140

I would like to urge the browser developers/makers to adopt existing proposals which came through open consensus which do precisely cover the same use cases (and more!) W3C Reference Note on Selectors and States: https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-states/ It is part of the suite of specs that came through the W3C Web Annotation Working Group: https://www.w3.org/annotation/ More examples in W3C Note Embedding Web Annotat…

Are there any guidelines for chromium development? It seems like one can just commit a feature to it and make half the world use it.

Regarding URL hash abuse elsewhere: this current development in Chromium is different from front-end frameworks and specific websites doing it because SomeSite can't break OtherSite while both having a different way to handle the hash.

Now Chromium randomly claims part of the hash which others now need a workaround for? Are these devs serious?

edit: dear downvoter, explain yourself :)

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

#175

Post by ru999gol »

chrismorgan wrote: post #165
ru999gol wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm so glad that google just sometimes ignores W3C's horrible design-by-committe nonsense. Its the same reason XHTML failed. #selector(type=TextQuoteSelector,exact=foo) vs. #targetText=foo /edited to be a more fair comparison

Such fragments don’t need to be particularly human-readable, only machine-readable. Given that, greater flexibility is generally a virtue: different matching strategies will work better in different contexts, and different tools can benefit from it. Consider the increased scope of the annotations feature—it’s designed for things like more robust referencing, bookmarking with annotations and other things like that. Th…

it adds a huge amount of unnecessary complexity for such a simple feature

There is a reason nobody implemented the W3C proposal, If I have the choice between a simple working solution that anyone can describe in a single sentence specification and a hundred page specification with tons of unneeded features that nobody is going to implement ever, I choose the former. I wonder how much hate Mozilla would've gotten for the same feature, probably none.

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

#176

Post by k_bx »

ajnin wrote: post #136
k_bx wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This technique (redirecting through some dummy ?url=... page) is a common way of doing an external redirect on any service you're building. It's a simple way of making it impossible to see the actual Referer to external website, which is more secure to your data and the service you're building (e.g. Gmail).

There's a standard way to do that, which is to add a rel="noreferrer" tag to your outgoing links.

Code usually doesn't carry final HTML in its data structures, whereas converting a URL in a single place where it's extracted is easy. In other words, making sure you didn't miss to put rel=noreferrer everywhere is way harder.

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

#177

Post by k_bx »

martin_a wrote: post #166
k_bx wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This technique (redirecting through some dummy ?url=... page) is a common way of doing an external redirect on any service you're building. It's a simple way of making it impossible to see the actual Referer to external website, which is more secure to your data and the service you're building (e.g. Gmail).

> It's a simple way of making it impossible to see the actual Referer to external website It's about tracking outbound links, not about masking the referrer. As already mentioned, there are standard ways for that.

Tracking can be done in JS via onclick event also. What makes you so sure it's not about masking referrer?

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

#179

Post by detaro »

ajnin wrote: post #136
k_bx wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This technique (redirecting through some dummy ?url=... page) is a common way of doing an external redirect on any service you're building. It's a simple way of making it impossible to see the actual Referer to external website, which is more secure to your data and the service you're building (e.g. Gmail).

There's a standard way to do that, which is to add a rel="noreferrer" tag to your outgoing links.

And it still makes somewhat sense to not entirely rely on it, given people still use browsers that do not support it.

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

#180

Post by fock »

csarven wrote: post #140

I would like to urge the browser developers/makers to adopt existing proposals which came through open consensus which do precisely cover the same use cases (and more!) W3C Reference Note on Selectors and States: https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-states/ It is part of the suite of specs that came through the W3C Web Annotation Working Group: https://www.w3.org/annotation/ More examples in W3C Note Embedding Web Annotat…

Typical GOOG move. Add some code, break the web outside the Google way. Why can't those guys write an RFC "Content sublocator-protocol for diverse media"...

Well, I started writing this and read your answer. This is not a problem specific to html/the web, for example I regularly encounter this when referencing things in pdfs. Will definitely have a look at this!

Post reply on HN