If you create a function to manage opening a link in a new window like this and return false (thus negating the click on the link but still running the function code), then the link will still work without javascript but more importantly it will also work in all other situations (middle-click open in tab and any right-click open in xxxxxx calls).
Having a list of whitelisted sites for popups seems like a baindaid solutions and it kills potential functionality that may well be justified. The idea of only allowing window.location redirects is better IMHO.
Additionally, if browsers supported some means to query weather or not popups were allowd in a particular instance as per the users settings then people could code for them better as well (ie, buy not creating dis-functional links).
"Such software could only be used for false incrimination."
Only?
What about multimedia shows, installations and artworks?
It's not uncommon and such software already exists, I've even toyed with it myself when I was at University.
And as others have pointed out, the photos aren't likely to be used as evidence. In this respect they are more like a wanted poster than anything else.
Slashdot Mirror
Thankyou!
I can't agree more.
If you create a function to manage opening a link in a new window like this and return false (thus negating the click on the link but still running the function code), then the link will still work without javascript but more importantly it will also work in all other situations (middle-click open in tab and any right-click open in xxxxxx calls).
Having a list of whitelisted sites for popups seems like a baindaid solutions and it kills potential functionality that may well be justified. The idea of only allowing window.location redirects is better IMHO.
Additionally, if browsers supported some means to query weather or not popups were allowd in a particular instance as per the users settings then people could code for them better as well (ie, buy not creating dis-functional links).
"Such software could only be used for false incrimination." Only? What about multimedia shows, installations and artworks? It's not uncommon and such software already exists, I've even toyed with it myself when I was at University. And as others have pointed out, the photos aren't likely to be used as evidence. In this respect they are more like a wanted poster than anything else.