qutebrowser/doc/notes
2014-12-15 23:42:51 +01:00

83 lines
4.0 KiB
Plaintext

henk's thoughts
===============
1. Power to the user! Protect privacy!
Things the browser should only do with explicit consent from the user, if
applicable the user should be able to choose which protocol/host/port triplets
to white/blacklist:
- load/run executable code, like js, flash, java applets, ... (think NoScript)
- requests to other domains, ports or using a different protocol than what the
user requested (think RequestPolicy)
- accept cookies
- storing/saving/caching things, e.g. open tabs ("session"), cookies, page
contents, browsing/download history, form data, ...
- send referrer
- disclose any (presence, type, version, settings, capabilities, etc.)
information about OS, browser, installed fonts, plugins, addons, etc.
2. Be efficient!
I tend to leave a lot of tabs open and nobody can deny that some websites
simply suck, so the browser should, unless told otherwise by the user:
- load tabs only when needed
- run code in tabs only when needed, i.e. when the tab is currently being
used/viewed (background tabs doing some JS magic even when they are not being
used can create a lot of unnecessary load on the machine)
- finish requests to the domain the user requested (e.g. www.example.org)
before doing any requests to other subdomains (e.g. images.example.org) and
finish those before doing requests to thirdparty domains (e.g. example.com)
3. Be stable!
- one site should not make the complete browser crash, only that site's tab
Upstream Bugs
=============
- Web inspector is blank unless .hide()/.show() is called.
Asked on SO: http://stackoverflow.com/q/23499159/2085149
TODO: Report to PyQt/Qt
- Report some other crashes
/u/angelic_sedition's thoughts
==============================
Well support for greasemonkey scripts and bookmarklets/js (which was mentioned
in the arch forum post) would be a big addition. What I've usually missed when
using other vim-like browsers is things that allow for different settings and
key bindings for different contexts. With that implemented I think I could
switch to a lightweight browser (and believe me, I'd like to) for the most part
and only use firefox when I needed downthemall or something.
For example, I have different bindings based on tab position that are reloaded
with a pentadactyl autocmd so that <space><homerow keys> will take me to tab
1-10 if I'm in that range or 2-20 if I'm in that range. I have an autocmd that
will run on completed downloads that passes the file path to a script that will
open ranger in a floating window with that file cut (this is basically like
using ranger to save files instead of the crappy gui popup).
I also have a few bindings based on tabgroups. Tabgroups are a firefox feature,
but I find them very useful for sorting things by topic so that only the tabs
I'm interested at the moment are visible.
Pentadactyl has a feature it calls groups. You can create a group that will
activate for sites/urls that match a pattern with some regex support. This
allows me, for example, to set up different (more convenient) bindings for
zooming only on images. I'll never need use the equivalent of vim n (next text
search match), so I can bind that to zoom. This allows setting up custom
quickmarks/gotos using the same keys for different websites. For example, on
reddit I have different g(some key) bindings to go to different subreddits.
This can also be used to pass certain keys directly to the site (e.g. for use
with RES). For sites that don't have modifiable bindings, I can use this with
pentadactyl's feedkeys or xdotool to create my own custom bindings. I even have
a binding that will call out to bash script with different arguments depending
on the site to download an image or an image gallery depending on the site (in
some cases passing the url to some cli program).
I've also noticed the lack of completion. For example, on "o" pentadactyl will
show sites (e.g. from history) that can be completed. I think I've been spoiled
by pentadactyl having completion for just about everything.