3 ms·
In another time and place, and if Google wasn't involved, I doubt this would even hit the front page of HN. People have been embedding tons of state into URLs f
by cromwellian 11y ago
In another time and place, and if Google wasn't involved, I doubt this would even hit the front page of HN. People have been embedding tons of state into URLs for years without obfuscating/encrypting them. Web apps should be idempotent with respect to URLs, and bookmarking any screen you're looking at should allow you, the user, to return to that state.
Maybe there should be a fix for this, at least to encrypt the old query, but realistically, this behavior is widespread in web apps, and it's only newsworthy because Google.
- lukeschlather 11y agoUnnecessary state should not be present in the URL. Yeah, people do it all the time, but it's sloppy coding and bad for many reasons, including those described in the article.
- voltagex_ 11y agoWhat about allowing people to bookmark parts of a single page app?
- detaro 11y agoHow does this contradict not keeping state unnecessary to return to a place in the app? (as in this case, past state). I'd think most users expect that a URL leads them to the same view again, but not that it preserves their history to get there.
- voltagex_ 11y agoWhat about allowing people to bookmark parts of a single page app?