Blink tag removed from Firefox
mozilla.org
mozilla.org
It's tough, obviously, because we can't have cruft build up all over. But this seems like a fairly straightforward case that a browser could shim out in JavaScript by default. Blink is a pretty straightforward piece of internet history. It's not like <applet>, which, while also a piece of history, actually carries legitimate complexity/security risks.
So it's not exactly the same as removing <center>: Other browsers already didn't support it.
I was trying to find the ES standard where it's specified but I'll settle for this[1] instead. Interestingly enough you have quite a few HTML wrapping functions as part of the spec.
[1]: http://javascript.spec.whatwg.org/#string.prototype.blink
<p style="color: red">
<script>
var str="•";
document.write(str.blink());
</script>
</p>
"Enable JavaScript" preference checkbox has been removed and user-set values will be reset to the default
"Load images automatically" and Always show the tab bar" checkboxes removed from preferences and reset to defaults
I am tired of having my freedoms stripped from my browser without any representation into the process. As a user of the browser I was not adequately informed of the upcoming changes nor was I given an opportunity to choose not to upgrade.
THIS MUST END
Contact me for further information, the revolution begins today.
pretty sure those options went off because enough people decided that the preferences/option panel was too complicated and these were the ones that telemetry indicated were the least used.
This is not a conspiracy, just making browser hard to break for people who check boxes and forget about these. For those, browser is broken!
Those who know what disabling JavaScript actually does still have a way to disable! Where does all the privacy talk come in between?
When I got my last company laptop without all these things set, I was surprised how painful it was to try and download anything without a proper adblocker and noscript. I don't know how people do it.
https://socialcam.com/v/39HPvZde
Protesters can be heard chanting:
"WHAT DO WE WANT?"
"The ability to disable tabbed browsing"
"WHEN DO WE WANT IT"
"Possibly in the next point release, but the next major is cool too"
I agree that these options are for power users, but my fear is that soon after they relegate the ability to disable javascript to the bowels of the application, they will soon remove it entirely. And that this decision is in fact not driven just by the fact that it is seldom used, but driven more-so by the corporate interests they hold with advertising and other online entities that serve not for the browser users, but their own corporate interests. This fundamentally collides with the intent of the Mozilla foundations purpose and this behavior must stop.
The ability to disable javascript has been on the main screen of the options panel because it serves a very important purpose.
Also the ability to not show tabs when browsing a single web page because for that use case, it is more optimal to not show a tab and waste the screen real estate on dead space.
They have fundamentally altered the Firefox browser in a fundamental way that is not configurable and have not provided reasonable alternative.
I refuse to accept any so called "Add-On". These features are not to be pushed off into to the extremities of the community and be forgot about. I firmly believe that any such browser serving only the interests of the user would see these features as being non-optional options and should exist in perpetuity for the life of that software.
Which way I'd this one going to go? On or of? And the fact that I have to ask tells me that maybe they should not have removed the option.
Personally I'm glad it's in the visible direction though.
An option should only be removed if the "better" way is obvious.
NoScript doesn't appear to have these fine tuning options?
`<blink>Dropped blink effect from text-decoration: blink; and completely removed <blink> element </blink>`
Start up firefox and give it a nice sendoff.
The idea was first discussed at a bar in Mountain View, CA.
from The Book of Mozilla, 12:10
( http://www.vice.com/read/its-now-possible-to-hire-fake-prote... )
The lack of it was the last thing that was keeping me using Firebug.
http://css-tricks.com/centering-in-the-unknown/
(talks about a CSS/divs solution, but as it mentions there are differences between the two). In general if you're dealing with a design that involves centering something with a dynamic size vertically, or one which involves having the height or width of two dynamic elements add up to the width of a third adjacent element (ie. "rowspan" and "colspan" in table-speak), there's a decent possibility that using a table might just be the least-hacky way to implement something. Bearing in mind that hackiness is a bit subjective :)
I saw a page showing how it could be achieved using only divs, but really, it was a complete rube goldberg machine, the sole purpose of which, seems to be to adhere to the religion of not using tables.
I get that table layouts have their own issues but I think its silly to be dogmatic about refusing to use them where it's clearly the best hammer to drive in that nail.
But seeing tables being used for layout annoys me far more than the blink tag.
How come? CSS positioning is pretty unintuitive, and sometimes it's just easier to get something working with tables. If the end results look fine, what's the problem? Table-based layouts aren't in-your-face like the blink tag was.
Oh, and don't view-source on HN ;)
So, just FYI, if you find yourself generating HTML for something like HN anytime in your life.
I find divs and spans easier myself but I guess, yeah, at the end of the day if it looks fine and it loads fine then it's fine. Too much pain from hand-coding too many tables has made me twitchy and curmudgeonly.
Oh, and don't view-source on HN ;)
Oh, i'm aware... It's just too bad html doesn't provide elements that handle nested lists. If only. Ah well.
as a <table> user, I feel vindicated :P
Edit: typo
On the other hand, I like the idea of less and more generic constructs that can be adapted to achieve some need. Specialized tags like dd, address, details, summary, code, blockquote, etc just seem superfluous.
http://cheese.blartwendo.com/web21-demo.html
;)