7 ms·

Annoyingly Chrome doesn't even show the 'www' any more unless you actually click on the URL bar

by 6nf 7y ago

numlock86 7y ago
For me it even takes two clicks: The first will just mark the visible URL, the second will reveal the complete URL including the protocol.
feanaro 7y ago
These URL mangling behaviours of Chrome are getting really insane. It kind of works for very well known, ultra large sites like Facebook, Youtube, Google and other large corporations, but how are you supposed to know whether you're at the right place for the myriad of smaller and/or personal websites if most of the URL is hidden?
- Avamander 7y ago
  Honestly, you should be redirecting from either www. to . or vice versa, having one of them broken or doing something else is bad in 99.99% of cases.
  - notfashion 7y ago
    The way you are using "www." and "." is incorrect. The dot isn't part of the local hostname "www". It is a separator or delimiter for the textual elements in the domain name. "Redirecting from (or to) ." is a weird and as far as I know completely wrong way to talk about redirecting from or to the domain name one level up in the hierarchy. The only time a dot plays any role in a domain name (other than that of a simple separator) is when it's used at the end of the fully qualified domain name.
    - Avamander 7y ago
      What if I'm talking about redirecting an entire TLD "www" to ""? Obviously it's a separator, I just found writing "" and "www" too weird. Not to mention that in this context where you're not really a recursive DNS resolver it really doesn't matter how one specifies the existence or lack of it of a subdomain. In addition to that some things use "@" (instead of the dot I used).
      - notfashion 7y ago
        Whether it feels weird or not, the hostname label is "www". The hostname-as-tld example is sort of against the rules: https://serverfault.com/questions/907226/is-it-possible-to-create-an-a-record-for-a-global-tld https://serverfault.com/questions/907226/is-it-possible-to-c... Either way, "." by itself can only meaningfully refer to the root, not some arbitrary enclosing domain name. There is no way you will convince me that using "." as a shorthand for "parent domain" is a good idea, for that and all the other reasons.
- isostatic 7y ago
  That’s the whole idea
gsich 7y ago
chrome://flags
unethical_ban 7y ago
I understand the idea of highlighting the apex domain, due to malicious sites. bankofamerica.com.site.eu/login, and so on. I wonder if they could have done some other kind of highlighting or UI trick to promote the "site.eu" portion of the link, rather than hiding the subdomains.

Annoyingly Chrome doesn't even show the 'www' any more unless you actually click on the URL bar

by 6nf 7y ago

Annoyingly Chrome doesn't even show the 'www' any more unless you actually click on the URL bar

For me it even takes two clicks: The first will just mark the visible URL, the second will reveal the complete URL including the protocol.

feanaro 7y ago

These URL mangling behaviours of Chrome are getting really insane. It kind of works for very well known, ultra large sites like Facebook, Youtube, Google and other large corporations, but how are you supposed to know whether you're at the right place for the myriad of smaller and/or personal websites if most of the URL is hidden?

Avamander 7y ago
Honestly, you should be redirecting from either www. to . or vice versa, having one of them broken or doing something else is bad in 99.99% of cases.
- notfashion 7y ago
  The way you are using "www." and "." is incorrect. The dot isn't part of the local hostname "www". It is a separator or delimiter for the textual elements in the domain name. "Redirecting from (or to) ." is a weird and as far as I know completely wrong way to talk about redirecting from or to the domain name one level up in the hierarchy. The only time a dot plays any role in a domain name (other than that of a simple separator) is when it's used at the end of the fully qualified domain name.
  - Avamander 7y ago
    What if I'm talking about redirecting an entire TLD "www" to ""? Obviously it's a separator, I just found writing "" and "www" too weird. Not to mention that in this context where you're not really a recursive DNS resolver it really doesn't matter how one specifies the existence or lack of it of a subdomain. In addition to that some things use "@" (instead of the dot I used).
    - notfashion 7y ago
      Whether it feels weird or not, the hostname label is "www". The hostname-as-tld example is sort of against the rules: https://serverfault.com/questions/907226/is-it-possible-to-create-an-a-record-for-a-global-tld https://serverfault.com/questions/907226/is-it-possible-to-c... Either way, "." by itself can only meaningfully refer to the root, not some arbitrary enclosing domain name. There is no way you will convince me that using "." as a shorthand for "parent domain" is a good idea, for that and all the other reasons.
isostatic 7y ago
That’s the whole idea

gsich 7y ago

chrome://flags

unethical_ban 7y ago

I understand the idea of highlighting the apex domain, due to malicious sites. bankofamerica.com.site.eu/login, and so on. I wonder if they could have done some other kind of highlighting or UI trick to promote the "site.eu" portion of the link, rather than hiding the subdomains.