86194 - (useragent) More power to the user

Status: RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

(Core Graveyard :: Tracking, enhancement)

Description

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

<introduction>
In my opinion, the browser is the user's tool and should always follow the
user's wishes, no matter what. Websites deliver content to the user, and it is
completely up to the user what he or his browser does with it (as long as he
doesn't redistribute it). If websites specify a certain layout or behaviour,
this is only a suggestion.

In the past, Netscape and Microsoft, in their try to get the content providers
on their side, recently even being content providers themselvesm, and making the
browser platform for more and more content/applications, gave more and more
power to the website. This power is often completely abused and *commonly* used
in a misguided way, at least IMHO.

While many users like a nifty presentation, many other (and sometimes even the
same) users are sick of websites strongholding their visitors or just being
designed inkompetently. These latter users just want to get the content and
ignore whatever is being suggested as layout or behaviour.

Traditional examples for that are Don't Load Images Automatically or Always Use
My Colors/Fonts. Unfortunately, today, not all of the controversial "features"
are optional.

In short: "Just the content, mam." This bug os about making Mozilla a browser
which suits this class of users.

The argument "If you don't like a site, don't visit it." is not valid, because
the quality of the web design often has little relation to the quality of the
content (as do the people responsible for it). I might want or even need to get
to some content of a certain site, but its webdesigner was braindead or
inkompetent, making my use of the website hard, unless my browser gives me the
option to ignore all but the content.
</introduction>

This bug is a tracking bug to list bugs which allow the user to ignore certain
parts of remote "content" (HTML, XML, mails etc.) while getting to other parts.
Disabling of certain of all layout or bahaviour specified by the remote party is
ontopic.

Examples (some of them have been implemented long ago):
- Disable JS
- Always use my fonts
- Minimum font size x pts
- Don't loop animated GIFs
- Forget cookies at shutdown
- Disallow sites to override the context menu

I know that this topic is very broad, but I believe that this bug will be useful
for people seeking for control over their browser.

Everybody: Feel free to add blocking bugs.

Customizing Mozilla <http://www.mozilla.org/unix/customizing.html> lists options
already present, but hidden, in Mozilla.

Comment 1

[AriB]

Don't forget:
 - pop up windows
 - midi/wavs any audio that starts playing
 - flash/shockwave

Comment 2

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

.

Comment 3

[Dan Tobias]

Also opening links in new windows... I'd really love a way to disable this, or
to make it use tabs instead.

Comment 4

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

You can already override <a href target=xxx>. Bug 64560 (adding as blocker) is
about JS window.open.

Comment 5

[Matthias Buecher]

Regarding the introduction a "fix HTML" option would be useful, as some pages
(mostly created with M$ FrontPage) say they are HTML 4.0 but tables are missing
the closing tag, this leads to a blank display in Netscape/Mozilla (couldn't
test 0.9.9 yet, as I mail all authors about their page problem :).

Just my two cents
Maddes

Comment 6

[Jonadab the Unsightly One (Nathan Eady)]

103452 window.close() currently lets a website close all of
       my tabs, not just the one that does the closing.
107949 window.open() currently can take away UI elements
       that are none of the website's business (related
       to 86195 and 118717).

Maybe also:

38521  Preferences Toolbar (makes it easier for users
       to turn prefs on and off while browsing)
       (But this doesn't relate to the ability to control
       websites, so much as the ability to do more easily
       what can already be done in the prefs dialogs.  So
       maybe this is not a dependency here.)

Comment 7

[Dave]

I nominate the following bugs as blockers for this bug, to be added to the
dependency list at the discretion of others who might know better:
Bug 55366 - Don't reveal UI language to site/page
Bug 57555 - UA-string is telling sites too much about the system
Bug 122453 - General policy for sending referrer information
Bug 78104 - [RFE] Pattern-matching based image blocking
Bug 94035 - [RFE] Allow blocking of any media type by site (like cookies and images)

Comment 8

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

David Shepperton, thanks for the links, but I don't consider general privacy
bugs part of this bug. You should be able to query for them using the privacy
keyword.

Comment 9

[ondrej]

disable JS per location (script file/site/domain...) like 'Cookie manager',
'Image Manager', ...

Comment 10

[Hanspeter Niederstrasser]

Nominating bug 161903: Add pref for ignoring window size options on window.open().

This is a sister bug to bug 107949, which is already a blocker of this bug.  Bug
107949 allows the user to say "Always show this part of the chrome on a popup
window".  Bug 161903 says "Always make popups fit between these user-defined
dimensions".

Comment 11

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

Adding dep bugs from bug 86195. It was meant to sort the deo bugs a bit, but was
not used. Fixing it causes too much spam.

Comment 12

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

*** Bug 86195 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 13

[Gérard Talbot]

These are bugs related to window.open(). They all have an interactive testcase
(see URL or attachment). 
http://jibbering.com/du/MozPopupHelpTestcaseDebugger.html

Bug 149077: window.open produces incorrectly sized child-window. IMO, this bug
is simply related to default browser margins applied to the body.

Bug 160791: window.screenX & window.screenY could not be set to accurate values.

Bug 174519: The window feature "titlebar=yes" will open a popup maximized
covering the window taskbar

Bug 176304: Option to disallow scripts from hiding toolbars (Phoenix branch)

Bug 176320: Minimal innerWidth/innerHeight values for popup windows. Definitely
a bug in the code and in the documentation as well.

Bug 176342: windows opened using innerHeight/Width can open partially offscreen.
This bug matches perfectly bug 118717.

Bug 177838: Make all popup windows resizable, ignoring resizable=no. Bug 101509
is about making it a UI setting preference.

Bug 179704: Implement sizeToContent as a window feature, a window option in the
window.open() method

I'm voting for bug 86194. More power to the user!!

Comment 14

[Stewart Gordon]

Bug 159036 was duped to bug 197919.  Replacing in depends.

Comment 15

[Prognathous]

Adding Bug 169678 - "Cursor shape should reflect the type of link hovered on
(e.g. pop-up/download/mailto...)"

Prog.

Comment 16

[Prognathous]

Adding Bug 133449 - "RFE: "Open this link" in right-click menu (command to force
a link to open in the same window, like in Netscape 3)"

Prog.

Comment 17

[doume.malaise]

I had the same problem that can be reproduced when I was editing my bookmark and had power failure.

My bookmark was lost an noway to retreive it.

It seems that Mozilla 1.7.1 works without backup while editing bookmark 

Comment 18

[Matt McCutchen]

What about bug 245333?  :P

Comment 19

[Michael Kohler [:mkohler]]

This is a mass change. Every comment has "assigned-to-new" in it.

I didn't look through the bugs, so I'm sorry if I change a bug which shouldn't be changed. But I guess these bugs are just bugs that were once assigned and people forgot to change the Status back when unassigning.

Comment 20

[Willy_ Foo_Foo]

(In reply to Ben Bucksch (:BenB) from comment #0)
> <introduction>
> In my opinion, the browser is the user's tool and should always follow the
> user's wishes, no matter what. Websites deliver content to the user, and it
> is
> completely up to the user what he or his browser does with it (as long as he
> doesn't redistribute it). If websites specify a certain layout or behaviour,
> this is only a suggestion.
> 
> In the past, Netscape and Microsoft, in their try to get the content
> providers
> on their side, recently even being content providers themselvesm, and making
> the
> browser platform for more and more content/applications, gave more and more
> power to the website. This power is often completely abused and *commonly*
> used
> in a misguided way, at least IMHO.
> 
> While many users like a nifty presentation, many other (and sometimes even
> the
> same) users are sick of websites strongholding their visitors or just being
> designed inkompetently. These latter users just want to get the content and
> ignore whatever is being suggested as layout or behaviour.
> 
> Traditional examples for that are Don't Load Images Automatically or Always
> Use
> My Colors/Fonts. Unfortunately, today, not all of the controversial
> "features"
> are optional.
> 
> In short: "Just the content, mam." This bug os about making Mozilla a browser
> which suits this class of users.
> 
> The argument "If you don't like a site, don't visit it." is not valid,
> because
> the quality of the web design often has little relation to the quality of the
> content (as do the people responsible for it). I might want or even need to
> get
> to some content of a certain site, but its webdesigner was braindead or
> inkompetent, making my use of the website hard, unless my browser gives me
> the
> option to ignore all but the content.
> </introduction>
> 
> This bug is a tracking bug to list bugs which allow the user to ignore
> certain
> parts of remote "content" (HTML, XML, mails etc.) while getting to other
> parts.
> Disabling of certain of all layout or bahaviour specified by the remote
> party is
> ontopic.
> 
> Examples (some of them have been implemented long ago):
> - Disable JS
> - Always use my fonts
> - Minimum font size x pts
> - Don't loop animated GIFs
> - Forget cookies at shutdown
> - Disallow sites to override the context menu
> 
> I know that this topic is very broad, but I believe that this bug will be
> useful
> for people seeking for control over their browser.
> 
> Everybody: Feel free to add blocking bugs.
> 
> Customizing Mozilla <http://www.mozilla.org/unix/customizing.html> lists
> options
> already present, but hidden, in Mozilla.

Totally agree !

Comment 21

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

This bug is primarily for conflicts of interest/wish between some other party and the end user.

Nicolas Barbulesco, the bugs you added do not fit this bug here. Most of them seem like random bugs. By your criteria, we'd add half of bugzilla here. Before making such drastic changes, please speak to the owners of the bug (reporter and assignee). I'm reverting the change, manually.

BTW: This bug isn't for comments either. If you have questions, please contact me by email.

Comment 22

[Nicolas Barbulesco]

As you like.

Many of the bugs I had added and you removed are problems where Firefox obeys too much the server / the Web author and does not obey enough the user.

Comment 23

[Worcester12345]

Can you add:
324777
320465
565512
565515
453455

Comment 24

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

worcester, this is not for bugs.

Comment 25

[Worcester12345]

(In reply to Ben Bucksch (:BenB) from comment #24)
> worcester, this is not for bugs.

But from the first post, it says:
"This bug is a tracking bug to list bugs which allow the user to ignore certain
parts of ...

Everybody: Feel free to add blocking bugs."

Plus, there are already many "Depends on:" bugs, so I thought that was part of its purpose. Sorry for my misunderstanding what it said there.

Comment 26

[Stewart Gordon]

(In reply to Worcester12345 from comment #25)
> But from the first post, it says:
> "This bug is a tracking bug to list bugs which allow the user to ignore
> certain parts of ...

Bug the bugs that you listed don't appear to me to be "bugs which allow the user to ignore certain parts of ..."....

Comment 27

[Benjamin Smedberg]

This bug is not being used to track/prioritize work at this point, so I'm going to close it to avoid surprising people.

Comment 28

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

If Firefox wants to give control back to end users, this bug is a valid source of ideas. It appears that Firefox started to put more focus on that aspect - doing what the user really wants -, so I think this is a viable tracker. Even if Firefox product management doesn't actively use it for tracking, it's a very useful tracker for the Open Source community. The issues tracked here are at the core of Open Source and Free Software values, of giving power to end users.

This tracker also goes directly towards several of the explicit goals of Mozilla as stated in the Mozilla manifesto https://www.mozilla.org/is/about/manifesto/:

• 02 The Internet ... must remain open and accessible. (E.g. typical blocking bug 167396)
• 03 The Internet must enrich the lives of individual human beings. (This bug puts the focus on the end user and not the web site.)
• 05 Individuals must have the ability to shape the Internet and their own experiences on it. (This is directly the goal of this tracking bug.)
• 06 The effectiveness of the Internet as a public resource depends upon ... innovation and decentralized participation worldwide. (This bug allows users to express such wishes and innovation.)
• 08 Transparent community-based processes promote participation, accountability and trust. (Ditto)

Given that this bug is directly contributing to the goals of the Mozilla Manifesto, I'm reopening it.

That said, the bug is still focused sharply towards the goals stated in the initial description (see top).

Comment 29

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

https://www-archive.mozilla.org/unix/customizing.html

Comment 30

[Takanori MATSUURA]

This bug lies at rest in the graveyard.