Posted by nh2 4 days ago
> @Reporter: As we are not very clear about the issue being faced by you, could you please elaborate on the same by providing detailed manual repro steps to reproduce the issue from our end.
> Also requesting you to share the expected, actual behaviours along with screen-cast for better understanding of the issue.
> *Note: Requesting you to copy-paste the entire content of "chrome://version/?show-variations-cmd" details to a .txt file format and attach it.
> Thanks..!
What could possibly be unclear about this bug report?
Another issue I filed:
https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40900126
I provided a click-by-click instruction with only 3 steps.
The triager created screen recordings twice, each time skipping an aspect of step 2; I wrote:
> "You did not follow step (2) of my repro steps: Loading a 1 GB file form a Windows file share (network folder)."
>
> ...
>
> This time you made the file 1 GB, but still do not load it from a Windows file share (network folder). Instead, you are again using your local Downloads folder.
Sounds like someone just had a desire to make this pesky bug report go away, requesting detailed version information, detailed steps to reproduce, expected behaviour and a screencast (!), hoping the reporter wouldn't provide them so they have an excuse to close the ticket?
What about .corp subdomains?
But I use firefox and I turned off autocomplete. And I use my own search instance (SearXNG)
That’s the beauty. The whole unified input can be presented as a UX simplicity gain, while this quote points at the actual business value. ;)
If you want the content of your URL bar to stay local you should disable suggestions
If I'm accidentally pasting what I thought was a URL but actually is some other text in the paste buffer in the combined input box, that text is already sent to the search engine (provided suggestions are enabled, which they are by default).
If I do the same in the split URL/search box situation, and paste it in the URL box, it would at most look into the browser's history, keeping the input local.
(I personally love the URL bar & search bar being the same bar)
Most people don't know how to navigate their local file system, let alone the internet.
AOL keywords were thing. Then fancy domain names that don't sound like domain names. Then search keywords. Then hashtags etc. The goal has always been to not ask the customer to think about it and just get to businesses.
The U stands for "uniform". Which kinda supports your point, actually.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Identifier#Re...
>The publication of IETF RFC 2396 in August 1998 saw the URI syntax become a separate specification and most of the parts of RFCs 1630 and 1738 relating to URIs and URLs in general were revised and expanded by the IETF. The new RFC changed the meaning of U in URI from "Universal" to "Uniform."
The alternative would be always opening search results in a new tab until I find what I'm looking for, but I don't need more tab clutter.
For searching, I had done that if you put a colon at first and then the name of the search engine, then it will search.
The fact of the matter is most people do not grok addresses, so a dedicated address bar is useless to them. It's bad user interface design that defies what most people can do.
Here's how most people actually use a web browser if they want to go somewhere, say Amazon:
1. Type "amazon".
2. Enter.
3. First result is (probably) amazon.com.
4. Click.
5. ????
6. PROFIT!
In the dark ages this was facilitated by setting the home page to a search engine like Google, changing the address bar to a search bar removes that additional step making it that much easier for the common man.
Is it horrible for security and privacy? Yeah. But you write a web browser for users, not security and privacy nazis.
Could we please not use such a term for privacy/security conscious people? Maybe it’s because I am German but I feel very uncomfortable being called such.
1. Type "mycompany-internal-gitlab".
2. Enter.
3. The expected thing should happen.
Resolved (2024.07.29.06), the Board [ICANN] reserves .INTERNAL from delegation in the DNS root zone permanently to provide for its use in private-use applications. The Board recommends that efforts be undertaken to raise awareness of its reservation for this purpose through the organization's technical outreach
The number of times I've typed some internal-only thing or raw IP address into a browser and had it go to a search page instead of the thing I want to talk to, I've lost track of in the past 15 years, and it's too damn high.
Whether intentional malice, or unintentional incompetence is moot by now. The effect has already been done.
>Firefox does this correctly
Perfect.
..maybe I can set up an own mock search service on localhost. Hmph, I will think about it
to keep different projects apart during development only to realize that you can't make that work with OAuth, because you can't use http://subdomain.localhost as a Oauth callback host. But you also can't share cookies between subdomain.localhost and localhost to redirect back without losing the session.
Any competent provider should give you some method for local testing and you should work with them given the provider you've chosen.