3 ms·
> they are not sent to the server The fact that the url hash-fragment isn't sent to the web server is a mere default. There's no controlling what plugins or sc
by ignoramous 5y ago
> they are not sent to the server
The fact that the url hash-fragment isn't sent to the web server is a mere default. There's no controlling what plugins or scripts do.
> hence, they disclose less info to the middlemen
Care to elaborate? I don't see how a url (over tls) exposes more information unless tls is MiTM'd.
> they can be shared easily from person to person
That's a property of the url itself, and not unique to the hash-fragment, per se?
- xcambar 5y agoFair point. > I don't see how a url (over tls) exposes more information unless tls is MiTM'd. What is not sent cannot be hacked. I was not suggesting an explicit security feature, rather a state of things. > That's a property of the url itself, and not unique to the hash-fragment, per se? Yes, but it makes for a nice combo with the previous point, as the URL now contains 2 things: the Locator itself that your peer and the server will access and (resp.) serve, plus the context that only your peer will have access to.
- dgb23 5y agoThank you for bringing this up. This is a very good point. I have thought of hash URLs being obsolete outside of some neat CSS tricks and section anchoring. But they still serve a purpose outside of that and can even simplify server side handling in some cases.