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

Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

bugs.chromium.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 919 posts

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#291

Post by Already__Taken »

The UX of moving what I'm looking at instantly under click is very unpleasant too, www. and http and even the "secure" "not secure" banners is like 200px shifts.

Lots of google's UI is getting (or has) things shifting instantly under the pointer it's quite annoying. The new gmail design quick-tools are often in the way, unknown until you actually click. Hell calling on my phone shifts the speaker and keypad buttons over instantly when someone picks up. Often placing the person I just called on hold if they answer too fast.

Wasn't this a pretty well covered UX rule to not move shit around on users. Up there with don't use modes and the like.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#292

Post by russellbeattie »

This is a classic example of techies, marketers and MBAs deciding what is "too confusing" for "normal" people to understand.

This is why the History channel shows reality TV instead of programs about, you know, history. It was decided that "history" that doesn't involve celebrities, aliens or Nazis is just too boring for normal people.

Google has decided that the 50% of population who are confused about the basics of URLs are more important than the rest of us who have been using them for over 25 years without problems. This will in theory allow Google to target a larger swath of the population. In practice, it simply takes something useful away from the rest of us.

It's "digital ochlocracy": The targeting of the least common denominator to the detriment of those with greater knowledge or expertise.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#293

Post by Macha »

neogodless wrote: post #97
ancarda wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't this (partially?) solved by making the domain black and the rest of the text gray? That's how it appears in Firefox. It makes it very easy to see "ycombinator.com".

Is this specific to a version of Firefox, or an extension? I'm using Firefox 62.0, and I do not see a difference in color between the domain and the rest of the URL. (Windows 10, 1080p screen.) ETA: Holy crap, if I zoom into a screenshot, I can see the difference. My eyes cannot benefit from this feature under normal circumstances, though. Looks like black (#000000) and gray (#807D7D).

You may want to check your monitor's brightness/gamma settings. That's a major difference to be invisble, and there's many sites that use light grey on white which are much much closer than this (sadly :( )

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#294

Post by masswerk »

masswerk wrote: post #268
parliament32 wrote: post #118

Considering a subdomain "trivial" is ridiculous... there's a difference between "www.example.com" and "example.com". Not only can they serve different sites, they can even have different DNS records! It seems that "m." is also considered a trivial subdomain. So when a user clicks a link to a "m.facebook.com" uri, they'll be confused why FB looks different when the browser reports it's on "facebook.com". I sincerely h…

This is certainly subverting the domain name system. I can't see the value or gain in security by this. (If you want to put focus on the domain, then display the host-part with less contrast, i.e. grey, but don't hide any potentially vital information. Otherwise, put out a RFC, defining "www" as a substitute for "*", or a zero-value atom, in order to guarantee consistent behavior.) Edit: There are also legal concerns…

A proposal for better security with domain names:

The domain name system has been around for decades and it's a clever and proven system. It can – and should be – taught in school and, arguably, knowledge of it is, while not difficult to obtain, essential in our times. Additional ambiguity in this is probably not what we want.

Arguably, the most sincere problems arise from mixed alphabets with Unicode domains and look-alike characters/glyphs. This could be addressed by a) going back to codepages (Unicode subranges) and defining a valid subset for each range, and b) enforcing a domain name (hostname and domain) to be in a single codepage. Clients should derive the codepage by the Unicode range and generate a codepage-identifier, which may be displayed as a badge, identifying the respective range. And, of course, any mixed domains should be regarded illegal and invalid. (We may even want to make this codepage-identifier a mandatory particle of any URI, preceding the hostname.)

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#295

Post by derefr »

ehsankia wrote: post #209
fireattack wrote: post #99

I'm ok with hiding "www.", but it also hides "m." which is sometimes very confusing (I once opened a m.facebook.com link and was very puzzled why it uses the mobile site when the URl bar just shows "facebook.com").

Facebook aside, don't the majority of sites show you mobile version by looking at headers. Isn't that the whole reason the "Show desktop version" feature even exists in Chrome, to send the desktop header? Very few sites actually use www. vs m. Clearly, in those cases, people aren't "confused" by the fact that they are seeing a mobile version on www., so other than the fact that you're used to Facebook specifically wo…

> Isn't that the whole reason the "Show desktop version" feature even exists in Chrome, to send the desktop header?

This is indeed what it does; I wish it did more!

Specifically, when visiting responsive pages on a phone where the mobile-viewport-size layout is just 100% broken, I’d love if “Request Desktop Site” actually set the viewport to be that of a desktop browser, and then set a low CSS/viewport zoom level to compensate. I want the dual of what happens when I set the “simulate a phone of X size” option in Chrome’s inspector!

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#296

Post by trocadero »

da_chicken wrote: post #237
trocadero wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those go to the same place for me

Not me. http://www.pool.ntp.org/ redirects me to https://www.ntppool.org/en/ . http://pool.ntp.org/ takes me to an "It works!" default Apache 2 page for an Ubuntu installation. As the comment in the issue describes, http://pool.ntp.org/ takes you to a random ntp server. If you want another example, try google.com using Google's own DNS: PS U:\> nslookup - 8.8.8.8 Default Server: google-public-dns-a.google.com Address…

>http://pool.ntp.org/ takes me to an "It works!" default Apache 2 page for an Ubuntu installation. As the comment in the issue describes, http://pool.ntp.org/ takes you to a random ntp server.

Either way, the ask was for a difference in www.example.com vs example.com. Not a difference in www.pool.example.com vs pool.example.com. In the latter case, the different subdomains will still be shown (AFAIK).

>Even if you ultimately end up at the same site through redirects, you're clearly not going to the same site initially.

Which is nothing that an end user is going to care about and doesn't provide an example to the asked question.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#297

Post by shodan666 »

trocadero wrote: post #173
parliament32 wrote: post #118

Considering a subdomain "trivial" is ridiculous... there's a difference between "www.example.com" and "example.com". Not only can they serve different sites, they can even have different DNS records! It seems that "m." is also considered a trivial subdomain. So when a user clicks a link to a "m.facebook.com" uri, they'll be confused why FB looks different when the browser reports it's on "facebook.com". I sincerely h…

>there's a difference between "www.example.com" and "example.com" Can you link to a site where these two are different?

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada
  https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#298

Post by hjfa0j »

brockers wrote: post #269
fireattack wrote: post #99

I'm ok with hiding "www.", but it also hides "m." which is sometimes very confusing (I once opened a m.facebook.com link and was very puzzled why it uses the mobile site when the URl bar just shows "facebook.com").

No this is simply bad implementation. As has already been mention, for internet services that also have websites for those services the www. subdomain makes total sense. > How will you distinguish http://www.pool.ntp.org vs http://pool.ntp.org ? In the above case pool.ntp.org is a decades old time service, while www.pool.ntp.org is a website describing the service.

That website looks unexpectedly modern.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#299

Post by archgoon »

meowface wrote: post #205
Klonoar wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same exact reason that api.domain.com or beta.domain.com matters - you're on a subdomain, not the root domain. That the internet and world at large made www the "kind of" root domain in many cases is an unfortunate thing, but I've not seen a modern server configuration that doesn't handle this case by default.

But when using HTTP(S), you nearly always expect the "www." domain and the root domain to host the same content. It's very, very rare that this isn't the case. Chrome appears to be hiding "m.", too, which is unfortunate (as would api. or beta. being hidden), but "www." is such boilerplate for HTTP at this point that I don't think it matters whether it's displayed or not.

> It's very, very rare that this isn't the case

Those tend to be the cases when I care very much.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#300

Post by Nadya »

trocadero wrote: post #296
da_chicken wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not me. http://www.pool.ntp.org/ redirects me to https://www.ntppool.org/en/ . http://pool.ntp.org/ takes me to an "It works!" default Apache 2 page for an Ubuntu installation. As the comment in the issue describes, http://pool.ntp.org/ takes you to a random ntp server. If you want another example, try google.com using Google's own DNS: PS U:\> nslookup - 8.8.8.8 Default Server: google-public-dns-a.google.com Address…

> http://pool.ntp.org/ takes me to an "It works!" default Apache 2 page for an Ubuntu installation. As the comment in the issue describes, http://pool.ntp.org/ takes you to a random ntp server. Either way, the ask was for a difference in www.example.com vs example.com. Not a difference in www.pool.example.com vs pool.example.com. In the latter case, the different subdomains will still be shown (AFAIK). >Even if you u…

>In the latter case, the different subdomains will still be shown (AFAIK).

http://www.pool.example.com displays as http://pool.example.com

Here's a gif: https://vgy.me/61I0DA.gif

For fun I'm going to set up a www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www record.

http://www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.example.com shows as example.com

E: I'll add it to my certs later but I did it: https://www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.aish...

E2: http://www.example.www.example.org shows up as example.example.org - this is fun.

Post reply on HN