I saw "Processing your request. Please wait." in the status bar, and I didn't know if it was a Mozilla thing or if the current site put it there when I clicked "Submit." Maybe some kind of icon or color change or font change (italics or something?) would make it more apparent where the text came from.
Definitely not JS engine. Over to UI design.
Assignee: rogerl → mpt
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
QA Contact: pschwartau → zach
Adding extra icons would be odd if they weren't clickable (like all the other icons in the status bar are), and italics are unreadable in some fonts commonly used for status bar text (e.g. Geneva). So, I suggest: * Where the font normally used in the status bar is of regular weight (the normal case), use bold weight for status text placed by the Web page. * Where the font normally used in the status bar is of bold weight, use regular weight for the status text placed by the Web page. I guess the right way to do this is to give remote status text a pseudo-selector, and theme that. --> XP Apps: GUI
Assignee: mpt → blake
Component: User Interface Design → XP Apps: GUI Features
QA Contact: zach → sairuh
Summary: it should be obvious somehow whether the current text in the status bar is from the current site or if it is a Mozilla message → Differentiate between status bar text from UI and from Web pages
*** Bug 43791 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Aufbau-P3]: Turning "blind links" into normal links would be very nice for porn surfing.
Summary: Differentiate between status bar text from UI and from Web pages → Differentiate between status bar text from UI and from Web pages (blind links)
Do we still need this now that we have a pref to prevent scripts from messing with the status bar?
Marking WONTFIX. You can prevent web pages from overriding your status bar text by going to Scripts & Windows/Scripts & Plugins and unchecking "Change status bar text".
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
And my question in comment 5 was why this would still be necessary?
How about this: when the mouse hovers over a link and when js can modify the status text (js on and modify status text on) then a little tooltip comes up with the address of that link or "Links to http://foo.bar.com/porn.html" or something or possibly the status bar expands upwards to display the link address. First one is better imho. That would be better than just differentiating between a link and js setting the status bar text IMO. Should I submit another enhancement request?
personally I like your option 2 better, because a link can have a TITLE= and then how would the tooltip work? Would the tooltip display both the TITLE and "Links to ___"?
I guess the tooltip could have both on 2 lines. I'm not sure if the expanding statusbar could be done nicely, but could look cool if done properly. Also the link properties dialog would already have the title, so showing it may or may not be needed. How 'bout some feedback from XUL & UI people?
Reassigning obsolete bugs to their respective Seamonkey owners (i.e. nobody). If you want this fixed for Firefox, change the Product and Component accordingly and reassign back to me.
Assignee: firefox → guifeatures
Status: REOPENED → NEW
Target Milestone: Future → ---
*** Bug 298903 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Filter "spam" on "guifeatures-nobody-20080610".
Assignee: guifeatures → nobody
QA Contact: guifeatures
A suggestion might be to add a plugin, call it Sight Lock, a little button added to the toolbar to toggle Sight Lock on or off. The function simply to bring up a warning message: "You are about to leave the Sight domain.com", and possibly adding buttons for continue, or go back.
Did you mean "site lock"? I'm not sure what that would accomplish?
Such would help stop Blind Links, Blind Redirects, Java Redirects, etc. For example, say you are clicking on a thumbnail thinking you are going to see a bigger picture, instead it takes you to another domain loaded with spam, popups, malware, etc. And no I mean Sight, if I can't reach in and touch the girls they are only a Sight. On Site, yum, touch, hold, hug... :) But alass, we can only enjoy the Sights.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.