Slashdot Mirror

Sounds like you need the 'session-saver' extension https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?application=firefox&category=Tabbed%20Browsing&nu mpg=10&id=436/ so if you close or crash Firefox you can pick up where you left off. A.K.A. lifesaver for a die hard wanderer. If that is too much for you, try this extension that removes the little enticing 'x' for closing tabs from your life. https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?application=firefox&category=Tabbed%20Browsing&nu mpg=10&id=2092/

Sounds like you need the 'session-saver' extension https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?application=firefox&category=Tabbed%20Browsing&nu mpg=10&id=436/ so if you close or crash Firefox you can pick up where you left off. A.K.A. lifesaver for a die hard wanderer. If that is too much for you, try this extension that removes the little enticing 'x' for closing tabs from your life. https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?application=firefox&category=Tabbed%20Browsing&nu mpg=10&id=2092/

I just took a visit to bugzilla. This "feature" is bug 308396.

There's an extension called Tab No X to revert to the old behaviour.

You're welcome to make a release, but you can't call it Firefox. Firefox is a protected trademark, as is Mozilla.

Besides, that's not what the article said.

I believe this might be what you're looking for. It also recovers your session in the case of a crash (either browser or OS)

You can also use SessionSaver. To restore a tab, go to Tools and select SnapBack Tab.

Specifically, search for the XML tag "maxVersion" in the http://www.mozilla.org/2004/em-rdf# namespace (usually written as <em:maxVersion>).

Or just get Nightly Tester Tools.

(Not linking because, AFAIK, his server was badly slashdotted last time it was mentioned in a comment. If you really want to, Google.)

Tab Mix Plus is an extension that has the "Undo Close Tab" feature, as well as many other useful ones. (The extension's page on the mozilla site is here.)
If you want only Undo Close Tab, that feature is also available in an extension called (what else?) undoclosetab.

Tab Mix Plus is an extension that has the "Undo Close Tab" feature, as well as many other useful ones. (The extension's page on the mozilla site is here.)
If you want only Undo Close Tab, that feature is also available in an extension called (what else?) undoclosetab.

There is no link because, as plenty of people have pointed out, it's NOT released yet.

However, if you do want to develop it, the entire sources (trunk and many branches) are available through CVS, see the DevMo page on the subject.

I was looking for the same thing as you, documentation about the features. You provided an interesting link, here's another one from the latest status meeting which includes the features, but a lot more :-)

Okay, seemingly little to no information about what comprises the new Firefox. For those who also might be curious, I have found these features described in a Firefox 2 Roadmap, but don't know if and how many of these made it to the new release.

Anyone else have any links to release notes?, what's new in FF 2?

I fail to see how the term 'open-source' is applicable to a translation.

What if it turns out that the document is talking about something that the US finds it needs to classify?

US intelligence officials say nearly all the documents released have been given at least a cursory reading by Arabic experts. Beth Marple, Negroponte's deputy press secretary, said amateur translators won't find any major surprises, such as proof Hussein hid stockpiles of chemical weapons.

I think it's a great idea, but how many people will have to translate a document with similar results before it can be trusted?

--
Posted with the Slashdot Firefox extension.

Take a peek at the NoScript Firefox extension - it allows selective site javascript disablement.

structure is necessary for any OS project to be successful and effective. however, whether it is 72 or 50, there seems to be a serious problem with the mozilla foundation when looking at the generous alienware that the developer of the best firefox extension gets. imho, there needs to be more transparency because firefox is to a large extent a community projet - yet, the money that the foundation generates does not go to the people who deserve it. there is not not even clarity on the absolute amount that the - open (yeah right) source - project generates. critising is always easy, so here are our thoughts.

The Mozilla Foundation announced Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen has also passed away from a long battle with cancer. Opera fans quickly claimed that Mozilla/Firefox copied them yet again, despite millions of other people dying from cancer earlier, including Firefox extension developer Jon Pederson, who died from cancer last year.

Duval's future plans -- in addition to the lawsuit -- involve a new open source project called Ulteo.

Ulteo seem to have ripped off Mozilla.org's web design. They even use the same class names. If you view their stylesheets, you'll see:

/* mozilla.org Base Styles
* maintained by fantasai
* (classes defined in the Markup Guide - http://mozilla.org/contribute/writing/markup )
*/

If you read the Mozilla.org site licensing policies, you'll see:

The rights in the trademarks, logos, service marks of the Mozilla Foundation, as well as the look and feel of this web site, are not licensed under the Creative Commons license, and to the extent they are works of authorship (like logos and graphic design), they are not included in the work that is licensed under those terms.

Seems to me that Mozilla.org want their text copied, but not their site design, which is the exact opposite of what Ulteo have done.

Duval's future plans -- in addition to the lawsuit -- involve a new open source project called Ulteo.

Ulteo seem to have ripped off Mozilla.org's web design. They even use the same class names. If you view their stylesheets, you'll see:

/* mozilla.org Base Styles
* maintained by fantasai
* (classes defined in the Markup Guide - http://mozilla.org/contribute/writing/markup )
*/

If you read the Mozilla.org site licensing policies, you'll see:

The rights in the trademarks, logos, service marks of the Mozilla Foundation, as well as the look and feel of this web site, are not licensed under the Creative Commons license, and to the extent they are works of authorship (like logos and graphic design), they are not included in the work that is licensed under those terms.

Seems to me that Mozilla.org want their text copied, but not their site design, which is the exact opposite of what Ulteo have done.

A lot of the middleware that converts data to HTML and back can go away when you use the right XML tools. XSLT does a good job of presenting static pages, and it can be fast if you cache the results as well.

But for dynamic pages (and forms) XML to XSLT to HTML leaves some big gaps:

1. The hierarchical XML data gets flattened out into name/value pairs in HTML form fields.
2. For the return trip HTML->?->XML, XSLT doesn't work; you can't run the transform backwards.
3. For dynamic pages, you're left with JavaScript or the dreaded "postback."

These are some of the reasons we updated the W3C HTML forms module to take account of XML data directly.

How does it fix the above problems?

1. The hierarchical XML data your PHP or other server-side code outputs is transmitted directly to the web browser, where it remains while the user futzes with only the nodes that the form specifies. The middleware that converts the XML data to web browser data is just printing the XML.
2. When the form results are submitted, they come back directly in XML, so there's no need to pick apart the name=value pairs and try to put them back into your data. The browser just posts the XML directly back as XML to your PHP or servlet.
3. For forms, as the data changes, the UI changes with it. If a node disappears, or appears, or if a value changes, entire sections of UI can appear and disapear just by listing a dependency on that data. And if you want dynamic pages, you can use the background submission feature to retrieve instance data asynchronously, and the presentation changes automatically.

Nice work if you can get it, you say? Well, as everyone knows Microsoft hasn't yet implemented XForms. (Heck, they haven't even implemented CSS, though we hear they do have it as a goal now.)

So what can you do today:

1. Use Mozilla or FireFox XForms 0.4. It's a one-click install download from the Mozilla website. Yes, it's beta. Yes it has bugs. Yes, IBM and others are fixing them. But it's open source.
2. Use FormFaces for most modern browsers (Firefox, IE, Safari, Opera) FormFaces is a cool JavaScript/AJAX application that you import into your web page with a one-line include, and it does everything described above. If you need cross-browser support right now, want dynamic AJAX forms, and want to interface to XML, this is your best bet, if you can tolerate a JavaScript program in your browser (i.e., it's done using AJAX). It's available under GPL and commercial licenses.
3. Use Chiba for backend processing Chiba is an open source Java-based back-end that converts your XHTML+XForms page into either an AJAX page or a static HTML page (good for Sec 503 compliance). Chiba is a great choice for applications that have a Java back end, as it puts less load on the browser than the large JavaScript engine of FormFaces, but I put it below FormFaces here because of the emphasis on PHP. (But, about half of Chiba is an XSLT transformation so a PHP port is possible.)
4. Use Formsplayer as an IE plugin FormsPlayer is a deluxe XForms processor plug-in for intranet applications using Internet Explorer, and has lots of other features as well, such as sidebar support.

Here's a quick example:

Let's suppose you have a book list you want to view, avaialble at http://example.com/books/list.

<books>
<book>
<title>No Nonsense XML Web Development with PHP</title>
<author>Thomas Myer</author>
<book>
...
<books>

If you want to display this data

There's nothing preventing your OpenID server from using a SSL or TLS certificate in just the way you say your bank does. Zooomr's partner OpenID service MyOpenID does in fact just that.

We do highly discourage use of "a window with no location bar" for the reasons you mention. You and I will probably remember that when using the service, but it is a difficult user eduction issue, granted. It would help a lot if things like Petname Tool take off.

their web-based interface to activate phones ONLY works on Internet Explorer. Period. They actually check for other browsers and REJECT ALL OTHERS.

Maybe firefox's nifty extension User Agent Switcher can help you on that one. The morons wont even notice in their log files.

Additionally, our point of sale requires Terminal Server Client (RDP)

In this one, RDesktop can help you. It even comes with Ubuntu and Novell's Suse.

Only a few parts are missing: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=acid2
Firefox 2.0 should render it perfectly.

It's just such a complex problem to tuckle that it seems to me (as a sideline spectactor) to be stupid to block the entire Firefox train just for it. They are working on it.

No no no, It's "The Kompany" not "The Company".

The Kompany is in reality a special division of the CIA, created to infiltrate the Open Sause Terrorist Group. Their special weapon, The Mozzarella project, contained a truth serum (mozarella) to make all Open Sause members spill their guts about the russian KGB Microsoft-drink organization.

I know this because I was analprobed when I was under the influence of Mozzarella!

Damn pizza delivery guy, I always knew he was up to no good.

...fix the #*%&ing! bugs already?

Take for example, the printing bug that has been around, unchanged, since at least 2001:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15489 2

NOTE: you'll have to copy-and-paste this URL in to your browser.

As another commenter noted in a fairly high-profile forum: Absolutely positioned frames (lost data on printing, critical). This bug and its earlier Duplicate (# 75213) are an unspeakable embarrassment for many Moz/FF supporters...

At this time there is no hint that it will ever be fixed. It is rated "critical" but no one appears willing to fix it. It has been around for at least five years! This bug is iconic of the geriatric bugs that have creeped through the Mozilla code.

So how about if Mozilla uses some of this money to pay someone to figure out how to bloody well fix this stuff?

Some of your wishes are obsolete! Firefox 1.5 already includes Javascript image creation in the form of the canvas element (more, more, more). PNG compression is included. And of course there's also SVG. In the future, there may even be OpenGL...

Some of your wishes are obsolete! Firefox 1.5 already includes Javascript image creation in the form of the canvas element (more, more, more). PNG compression is included. And of course there's also SVG. In the future, there may even be OpenGL...

Firefox isn't released under the GPL.

O rly?

From the FAQ:
"Is Firefox free?

Yes! Firefox is open source software, meaning that anyone has the right to download and use the browser for free, to distribute it unmodified to other people, and even to view and modify the source code under the terms of the Mozilla Public License."

And if you go to the licensing page which has more detail:
"This page details the licenses under which Mozilla source code can be obtained. At the moment, parts of the source are available under either the Netscape Public License (NPL) or the Mozilla Public License (MPL), often in combination with either the GNU General Public License (GPL) or the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL), or both. mozilla.org is working towards having all the code in the tree licensed under a MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-license; for more information, see the Relicensing FAQ.

Any code checked into our CVS tree needs to comply with the licensing policy.

Official binary releases from the Mozilla Foundation are released under the terms of Mozilla End-User License Agreements."

Since they're aiming for the LGPL, I would say the GPL part is redundant. They're building a browser that is LGPL and can be linked to any proprietary component they wish. Also obviously everything needs to be under the MPL because you have to agree to an EULA before using the official builds. If Mozilla was just GPL/LGPL, they couldn't do that. I guess this is the whole Gnome LGPL vs KDE GPL discussion all over again. But if you're looking to support a GPL browser, and not a LGPL one, Firefox isn't it...

From the FAQ:
"Is Firefox free?

Yes! Firefox is open source software, meaning that anyone has the right to download and use the browser for free, to distribute it unmodified to other people, and even to view and modify the source code under the terms of the Mozilla Public License."

And if you go to the licensing page which has more detail:
"This page details the licenses under which Mozilla source code can be obtained. At the moment, parts of the source are available under either the Netscape Public License (NPL) or the Mozilla Public License (MPL), often in combination with either the GNU General Public License (GPL) or the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL), or both. mozilla.org is working towards having all the code in the tree licensed under a MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-license; for more information, see the Relicensing FAQ.

Any code checked into our CVS tree needs to comply with the licensing policy.

Official binary releases from the Mozilla Foundation are released under the terms of Mozilla End-User License Agreements."

Since they're aiming for the LGPL, I would say the GPL part is redundant. They're building a browser that is LGPL and can be linked to any proprietary component they wish. Also obviously everything needs to be under the MPL because you have to agree to an EULA before using the official builds. If Mozilla was just GPL/LGPL, they couldn't do that. I guess this is the whole Gnome LGPL vs KDE GPL discussion all over again. But if you're looking to support a GPL browser, and not a LGPL one, Firefox isn't it...

Firefox isn't distributed under the GPL, it's source is distributed under the MPL (mozilla public license). It also has its own EULA that doesn't deal with development stuff.

Firefox isn't distributed under the GPL, it's source is distributed under the MPL (mozilla public license). It also has its own EULA that doesn't deal with development stuff.

You do have choice. Plenty of it. All you have to do is click the symbol in the left-hand corner of the search bar and choose another search engine. In addition, although Google is the default, there are other search engines included with Firefox without ever needing to add others. Plus you can change your start page from the orignal Google search anytime you want; mine is currently set at DeviantArt. Thus, you can change your start page from Google and your default search engine without even needing to download other search engines - that's there if you favorite isn't among the originals.

Skype doesn't work as well with AMD CPUs as it does with Intel CPUs and it was deliberately engineered to not work as well with AMD CPUs. In no way do I see Firefox limiting you as to the choice of search engines for use with the search bar (notice the link on the page for a more complete selection?) or preventing you from setting your home page to another site - which could be another search engine if you so choose. Even Yahoo or MSN.

Firefox is not released under the GPL.

Actually it is, kinda. Isn't Firefox offered under three licenses? NPL, MPL and GPL? If you want your code to make it back into mainline Firefox, you have to agree to license it three ways. But if you want to fork Firefox and make a GPL-only version, nothing stops you.

... Ok, I dug it up. They're attempting to get it all under the tri-license. Check it out. There are some portions that aren't GPL yet.

try Sunbird. its pretty good :)

function seteditmode(mode){
    document.getElementById("content").contentDocument .designMode=mode;
}
 
function apply(action,flag,value){
    if(!flag){ flag=false; }
    if(!value){ value=null; }
    document.getElementById("content").contentWindow.d ocument.execCommand(action, flag, value);
}

function seteditmode(mode){
    document.getElementById("content").contentDocument .designMode=mode;
}
 
function apply(action,flag,value){
    if(!flag){ flag=false; }
    if(!value){ value=null; }
    document.getElementById("content").contentWindow.d ocument.execCommand(action, flag, value);
}

Phishing protection is already available as an extension via the Netcraft toolbar extension.

There might be other reasons to use IE. For example, you might want to print: see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15489 2 (you'll have to copy-and-paste the URL in to the address bar - be sure to remove any spaces that Slashdot automatically added). This bug, and other equivalently ridiculous, debilitating, geriatric, bugs are what prevent the company I work for from using Firefox.

This bug is no closer to being fixed than it was several years ago. Western civilization may end before this is fixed. Who can guess?

In my opinion, Firefox developers should step back from implementing new whizbangs and fix the damn bugs. It's a lot less sexy, but it would do wonders for usability. It would also allow my organization to adopt Firefox as its default browser.

But I firmly expect to see pigs fly before anyone takes this advice.

Would you like to volunteer? we dont have enough people:
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Update:Home_Page#Volunteer ing

> Will google continue releasing the extension as part
> of Google Labs, or a product offering?

Great question. We're end-of-lifing the stand-alone extension as it is
released on Labs. Instead, we've integrated this feature into the
Google Toolbar for Firefox and it will go out in the next
release. Then one of two things happens. Case one is this feature (or
something like it) makes it into Firefox, in which case we rip it out
of the Toolbar and do all new development in Moz cvs tree. Case two is
that this feature does not make it into Firefox, in which case we
continue to support it in the Toolbar.

So, to answer your question, we'd very much like active development to
move into Moz cvs tree. But we won't force it.

Here is a some design documentation for the safe browsing add-on: http://wiki.mozilla.org/Safe_Browsing:_Design_Docu mentation

Here is the Bugzilla bug for turning on the feature. Remember that you have to copy and paste the link into the address bar because Bugzilla blocks slashdot. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32929 2

From what I understand, the idea is to make the feature an extension that is installed by default, kind of like the talkback error reporting tool. In "normal mode", the extension will make decisions on phishing sites based on a blacklist file that is downloaded from an update server, and every address that you visit will NOT be sent to Google or Mozilla for verification. If the user goes to turn on Enhanced Mode, a warning dialog will pop up telling them that information WILL be sent to Google or someone else, for the purposes of finding new sites to add to the blacklist files and online blacklist database. I don't think that enhanced mode will be turned on by default, but there are still a lot of things that are undecided.

Here is a some design documentation for the safe browsing add-on: http://wiki.mozilla.org/Safe_Browsing:_Design_Docu mentation

Here is the Bugzilla bug for turning on the feature. Remember that you have to copy and paste the link into the address bar because Bugzilla blocks slashdot. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32929 2

From what I understand, the idea is to make the feature an extension that is installed by default, kind of like the talkback error reporting tool. In "normal mode", the extension will make decisions on phishing sites based on a blacklist file that is downloaded from an update server, and every address that you visit will NOT be sent to Google or Mozilla for verification. If the user goes to turn on Enhanced Mode, a warning dialog will pop up telling them that information WILL be sent to Google or someone else, for the purposes of finding new sites to add to the blacklist files and online blacklist database. I don't think that enhanced mode will be turned on by default, but there are still a lot of things that are undecided.

That's exactly how they are going to do it. It will be an extension.

After all, the technology is a sole contribution of Google and their Safe Browsing extension http://www.google.com/tools/firefox/safebrowsing/.

For more detail regarding the implementation see http://wiki.mozilla.org/Safe_Browsing

Well, some people have expressed concern about the privacy implications of using such a service from Google. The same worries surfaced in the actual bug report too. Snippet from the first link (I'm not sure if this is limited to just the standalone extension, though): "1) Every request is transmitted to Google over HTTP, i.e. in clear-text."

I second the comment about Blazer being an abysmal product. I have the "web-surfing optimized" (as the article referred to it) T|X rather than the Treo, and the biggest detraction from the mobile web experiance on my PDA is Blazer. Everything you said about it, including all the problems, I experience.

I'd like to expound on your comment that there is no suitable browser alternative (for the Palm OS). Opera Mini can be run through a JVM (which is an adventure in it of itself), but it doesn't take advantage of the higher resolution screen, and is still a comprimise in my opinion.

Minimo is one of the most promising browsers currently under development in my opinion. Designed for PDAs and mozilla-based, it seems to be exactly what the Treo and T|X needs. However, the developers have already made it clear that there are no plans to support the Palm OS with the project.

I haven't had much luck finding anything else. Everything I find seems to be fixated with stripping out images and CSS, in an effort to conserve bandwidth (not a concern with WiFi!). These minimalist browsers are less user-friendly and capable than lynx in my opinion.

Anyone have a solution for the Blazer problem? What's the best browser for the Palm OS?

This will be interesting to see if this provides as much space as the Firefox extension, Gmail Space provides. The way it works, apparently, is to allow access to the file attachment method used by Gmail, providing an interface which appears to be like a file management interface. Very useful!

Hopefully Google will be good and provided enough space to make hacks like this obsolete. Not that they are bad, just inconvenient!

This will be interesting to see if this provides as much space as the Firefox extension, Gmail Space provides. The way it works, apparently, is to allow access to the file attachment method used by Gmail, providing an interface which appears to be like a file management interface. Very useful!

Hopefully Google will be good and provided enough space to make hacks like this obsolete. Not that they are bad, just inconvenient!