699890 - Enable Javascript in banner code for [3.6 upgrade campaign]

Status: VERIFIED WORKSFORME

(Firefox Affiliates Graveyard :: affiliates.mozilla.org, defect)

Description

[Chelsea Novak [:chelsea]]

A little backstory first. Engagement is working to upgrade Firefox users from 8> in the next month or so, before silent updates start. This will be a long term campaign, lasting well into 2012. 

One of the ways we identified that we could get users on up to date (especially 3.6 users) is to offer an affiliate button that, using JS, would detect if a Firefox user is something other than the latest version. The button would work something like this:

Out of date Firefox User: Upgrade your Firefox button is displayed linking to an upgrade page

Up to date Firefox User/or other browser: Firefox brand download message

mkelly said that we would need to so some dev work and testing to get this going. Other components in this campaign will be coming online throughout the rest of Q4. If we can include this in the 1.1 release that would be aces (but I know that's already kinda big), otherwise soon after is great too. 

I'll file separate bugs for designing and localizing the buttons. Maybe the stars will align and we can get the buttons built and the JS working around the same time.

Comment 1

[Chris More [:cmore]]

Removing the milestone as it will not landing Q4 2011 and thus will have to be prioritized with future quarterly work.

Comment 2

[Chelsea Novak [:chelsea]]

Will need this for Q1, so let's add it to the Q1 priority list.

Comment 3

[Osmose [:osmose, :mkelly]]

Let's use 1.2 milestone for Q1.

Comment 4

[Chelsea Novak [:chelsea]]

Just looking for an ETA on this as it's a part of a broader 3.6 upgrade campaign. Please let me know when in Q1 this is likely.
Thanks!

Comment 5

[Osmose [:osmose, :mkelly]]

Assigning to rik. 

This will require adding a new subclass of Badge, similar to how banners are set up. Hopefully it should be a relatively painless process. :P

Comment 6

[Anthony Ricaud (:rik)]

I'm wondering how we should distribute those snippets.

Should we give all the JS in the copy/paste area or just include a script tag?
Pros for full JS code:
- People know exactly what code will run on their domains.
- There are way less security issues to deal with for us.
Pros for script tag:
- We can automatically update the code if we need a change.

Comment 7

[Osmose [:osmose, :mkelly]]

I'd advocate for the script tag:

- We can show an un-minified version of the banner code on the 3rd step preview page; that's up-front enough for concerned developers to check, but ignorable enough for users who have no concerns to skip.

- Unless I'm mistaken, any security issues with embedding a script tag persist whether the script is inline or not. The exception to this is CSP that forbids inline scripts but allows any domain for external Javascript, which I don't think even makes much sense.

A few other comments:

- We should definitely consider minifying the Javascript for the external script tag.

- Once we've decided on how to implement this, we need some guidance in how to present the banner to the user in terms of the final generation step and the banner listing. Are there any additional attributes (like how banners have a size associated with them) that we want to list? Should we include a link in the badge list that will let the user see the un-minified JS after they've generated the banner?

- We'll need to do our translation for the badges in verbatim (and thus generate a new POT file) so that when we enter in the banner code, we only need to mark strings as translated and let the service do the rest.

Comment 8

[Osmose [:osmose, :mkelly]]

Moving this out of the 1.2 milestone; the upgrade banner is going to be implemented via server-side logic (see bug 719522), so this will instead apply to the eventual possibility of JS-based banners.

Comment 9

[Chelsea Novak [:chelsea]]

Let's move JS banners in general to the re-design spec. Closing for now unless there are objections.

Comment 10

[Matt Brandt [:mbrandt]]

Old bug for an old version of the site - bumping to verified