Bug 1067293 Comment 35 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

:adw, I'm happy to take this on if we think this is the right strategy. Personally, I feel like this makes sense especially now that other browsers are essentially doing the exact same thing. Friction now seems less than it probably was eight years ago, especially given the adoption of https.

It seems pretty actionable:
- Turn on the "Not Secure" text in the URL bar on http:// sites by default
- Trim `https://`, don't trim `http://`

It has the potential of making the URL bar a tad cleaner for the vast majority of use cases. 

I was thinking we could go further and omit `www.` from the value of the urlbar input for `https://` addresses, as we'll still have the ability to recover the full real URL via focusing on the urlbar.
:adw, I'm happy to take this on if we think this is the right strategy. Personally, I feel like this makes sense especially now that other browsers are essentially doing the exact same thing. It's probably less controversial now than eight years ago, especially given the adoption of https.

It seems pretty actionable:
- Turn on the "Not Secure" text in the URL bar on http:// sites by default
- Trim `https://`, don't trim `http://`

It has the potential of making the URL bar a tad cleaner for the vast majority of use cases. 

I was thinking we could go further and omit `www.` from the value of the urlbar input for `https://` addresses, as we'll still have the ability to recover the full real URL via focusing on the urlbar.

Back to Bug 1067293 Comment 35