5 ms·

I don't understand how people can accept the browser hiding the URL.

smarkov 3y ago
People with technical skills can't accept that, but the ones without them that make up the majority couldn't care less. The vast majority of people don't know how to read or utilize anything past the domain name, hence why you constantly see people copy paste 300 characters long URLs of images from Google. Hell, a good amount of people don't even look at the domain name which is why phishing is so common.
- avodonosov 3y ago
  Then browsers should make the url more visible and distinctive. Colorize URL elements, etc.
  - didntcheck 3y ago
    For what purpose?
    - avodonosov 3y ago
      see my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38275836 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38275836
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- cxr 3y ago
  URLs are not strictly technological oddities. Their closest equivalents are footnotes/citations. Marginalizing URLs as something that only "people with technical skills" do (and/or should?) care about is no different from any other phenomenon where you take some boring, everyday, mostly unremarkable practice that doesn't involve the use of a computer and then change it where the moment someone gets a whiff of the presence of a computer in the pipeline they throw up their hands and say, "I don't know"/"I don't get this"/"I'm not a computer person". It's really the doing of both non-technical people and technical people in and adjacent to the modern software industry alike that most people consider URLs gobbledygook instead of what they are: identifiers for a given work. It's especially perverse that the practices of both classes are responsible for most URLs being unsuitable for use Works Cited pages. That could definitely use some fixing, but we do such a poor job (in the US at least) already at explaining, during high school when it's supposed to be covered, the value of proper sourcing and citing that even smart kids come away thinking in terms of superficialities like the rigidity of formats and citation style rather than the actual fundamentals of scholarship. URLs are not exceptional in that regard.
laserbeam 3y ago
Phones have small screens, and most browsers only show the URL on demand when you do a gesture. Also, you generally can't fit the whole URL while in landscape on a phone. You need to scroll it sideways if you want to find something in it. I don't think we can expect URLs to be read in full by people on phones :(.
- avodonosov 3y ago
  On demand is ok. But there should be an easy and convenient way to see. > You need to scroll it sideways if you want to find something in it. > I don't think we can expect URLs to be read in full by people on phones :(. That's because it's implemented inconveniently, a single line. When user taps the address bar, the browser could expand it into an URL editor, conveniently wrapping lines by url parameter boundaries, etc
jankremer 3y ago
I don’t think it is even possible to display the full URL by default in Safari on iOS.
- hk__2 3y ago
  I don’t know which model you have, but on mine you wouldn’t even have the space to display more than a 5-6 characters after the domain name.
  - shric 3y ago
    Funnily, the post's example.of https://jvns.ca/blog/2023/02/28/some-notes-on-using-nix/ https://jvns.ca/blog/2023/02/28/some-notes-on-using-nix/ means I can see clearly the date and nothing more in my Firefox/Android URL bar
bitzun 3y ago
Firefox seems to always display the url after the protocol, even on mobile. I don't like the protocol omission, but I've grown to tolerate it.
- b112 3y ago
  Or mayhap, been forced to tolerate it? By UI freakazoids? (A scream goes out)Function before form, always!
- kstenerud 3y ago
  Meh, everything's converged on https now, unless you're loading from file (in which case you probably know already). With any other scheme, the browser is going to pop up a massive DANGER WILL ROBINSON that you have to click through. The scheme is rather pointless to display in a browser bar nowadays.
  - account42 3y ago
    Having a separate scheme for HTTPS was a mistake anyway. TLS should be a transport detail that doesn't change the URL at all just like DNSSEC, IPv6 and QUIC don't change the URL. The browser can still display the negotiated encryption and you need HSTS anyway to fully protect against downgrade attacks - and as older ciphers are broken even that is not going to be enough.
    - IlliOnato 3y ago
      I agree 1000%.
usrbinbash 3y ago
People without a technical background could accept a browser that doesn't display an URL at all. Just put a nice big Button with the Google-Logo somewhere, which for many people is "The internet" and they are happy. And anyone claiming otherwise should riddle me this: How do most non-technical people in the world access "awesomepageireallylike.something"? That's right, they click into the address bar, start typing until the string they remebered appears, and then click on that. And what is that? Exactly: A Google search.
- avodonosov 3y ago
  URL is a central concept in web browsing. Hiding it from users goes against the main usability principle that the user should understand what's going on. One does not need a technical background to understand URLs. Browser hiding URLs is like an OS hiding file system structure from users, because files and directories are "too technioal" for them.
  - usrbinbash 3y ago
    > that the user should understand what's going on Sure he should. But design maxime of a lot of contemporary software does exactly the opposite: Hiding as much of the "icky techy stuff" from the user as possible. > One does not need a technical background to understand URLs. That's true, but doesn't change the fact that most people don't. For example, how many people know that the domain of an URL is organised right-to-left? I met people in tech, including programmers, who never figured that out. > Browser hiding URLs is like an OS hiding file system structure from users, because files and directories are "too technioal" for them. I agree. And now open a contemporary smart phone interface, and show me, without any special tooling, the actual, "physical" file system. And these things are probably the most successful consumer computing platforms ever.
    - avodonosov 3y ago
      > And now open a contemporary smart phone interface, and show me, without any special tooling, the actual, "physical" file system. Yes, I had phones in mind when writting the above :) > And these things are probably the most successful consumer computing platforms ever. Users don't have better choice in this market.
rendaw 3y ago
I don't like what Google's trying to do, but I don't think the address bar is good at of the roles it currently sits in (establishing trust, encoding state), and stands in the way of attempting new modes.
AndroTux 3y ago
Why? Most urls nowadays are unreadable and nonsensical anyway. The only thing that really matters is the domain, and that’s displayed for you in a (hopefully) better way than many users would be able to parse themselves. Of course, you should always have the option to see the full URL, but why exactly do you need that clutter on display the whole time? It’s like complaining that the browser renders HTML instead of printing it all as unformatted text.
Cthulhu_ 3y ago
I don't see the address of buildings I'm in even when I stand in front of it on the street.
- guhidalg 3y ago
  True, and isn't the web amazing? If your website is nice, you always know exactly where you are by looking up! If only our buildings were this nice... But seriously, what are you trying to say, that we need to make software match our contemporary physical experience? No, we can do better.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

People with technical skills can't accept that, but the ones without them that make up the majority couldn't care less. The vast majority of people don't know how to read or utilize anything past the domain name, hence why you constantly see people copy paste 300 characters long URLs of images from Google. Hell, a good amount of people don't even look at the domain name which is why phishing is so common.

avodonosov 3y ago
Then browsers should make the url more visible and distinctive. Colorize URL elements, etc.
- didntcheck 3y ago
  For what purpose?
  - avodonosov 3y ago
    see my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38275836 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38275836
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
cxr 3y ago
URLs are not strictly technological oddities. Their closest equivalents are footnotes/citations. Marginalizing URLs as something that only "people with technical skills" do (and/or should?) care about is no different from any other phenomenon where you take some boring, everyday, mostly unremarkable practice that doesn't involve the use of a computer and then change it where the moment someone gets a whiff of the presence of a computer in the pipeline they throw up their hands and say, "I don't know"/"I don't get this"/"I'm not a computer person". It's really the doing of both non-technical people and technical people in and adjacent to the modern software industry alike that most people consider URLs gobbledygook instead of what they are: identifiers for a given work. It's especially perverse that the practices of both classes are responsible for most URLs being unsuitable for use Works Cited pages. That could definitely use some fixing, but we do such a poor job (in the US at least) already at explaining, during high school when it's supposed to be covered, the value of proper sourcing and citing that even smart kids come away thinking in terms of superficialities like the rigidity of formats and citation style rather than the actual fundamentals of scholarship. URLs are not exceptional in that regard.

laserbeam 3y ago

Phones have small screens, and most browsers only show the URL on demand when you do a gesture. Also, you generally can't fit the whole URL while in landscape on a phone. You need to scroll it sideways if you want to find something in it. I don't think we can expect URLs to be read in full by people on phones :(.

avodonosov 3y ago
On demand is ok. But there should be an easy and convenient way to see. > You need to scroll it sideways if you want to find something in it. > I don't think we can expect URLs to be read in full by people on phones :(. That's because it's implemented inconveniently, a single line. When user taps the address bar, the browser could expand it into an URL editor, conveniently wrapping lines by url parameter boundaries, etc

jankremer 3y ago

I don’t think it is even possible to display the full URL by default in Safari on iOS.

hk__2 3y ago
I don’t know which model you have, but on mine you wouldn’t even have the space to display more than a 5-6 characters after the domain name.
- shric 3y ago
  Funnily, the post's example.of https://jvns.ca/blog/2023/02/28/some-notes-on-using-nix/ https://jvns.ca/blog/2023/02/28/some-notes-on-using-nix/ means I can see clearly the date and nothing more in my Firefox/Android URL bar

bitzun 3y ago

Firefox seems to always display the url after the protocol, even on mobile. I don't like the protocol omission, but I've grown to tolerate it.

b112 3y ago
Or mayhap, been forced to tolerate it? By UI freakazoids? (A scream goes out)Function before form, always!
kstenerud 3y ago
Meh, everything's converged on https now, unless you're loading from file (in which case you probably know already). With any other scheme, the browser is going to pop up a massive DANGER WILL ROBINSON that you have to click through. The scheme is rather pointless to display in a browser bar nowadays.
- account42 3y ago
  Having a separate scheme for HTTPS was a mistake anyway. TLS should be a transport detail that doesn't change the URL at all just like DNSSEC, IPv6 and QUIC don't change the URL. The browser can still display the negotiated encryption and you need HSTS anyway to fully protect against downgrade attacks - and as older ciphers are broken even that is not going to be enough.
  - IlliOnato 3y ago
    I agree 1000%.

usrbinbash 3y ago

People without a technical background could accept a browser that doesn't display an URL at all. Just put a nice big Button with the Google-Logo somewhere, which for many people is "The internet" and they are happy. And anyone claiming otherwise should riddle me this: How do most non-technical people in the world access "awesomepageireallylike.something"? That's right, they click into the address bar, start typing until the string they remebered appears, and then click on that. And what is that? Exactly: A Google search.

avodonosov 3y ago
URL is a central concept in web browsing. Hiding it from users goes against the main usability principle that the user should understand what's going on. One does not need a technical background to understand URLs. Browser hiding URLs is like an OS hiding file system structure from users, because files and directories are "too technioal" for them.
- usrbinbash 3y ago
  > that the user should understand what's going on Sure he should. But design maxime of a lot of contemporary software does exactly the opposite: Hiding as much of the "icky techy stuff" from the user as possible. > One does not need a technical background to understand URLs. That's true, but doesn't change the fact that most people don't. For example, how many people know that the domain of an URL is organised right-to-left? I met people in tech, including programmers, who never figured that out. > Browser hiding URLs is like an OS hiding file system structure from users, because files and directories are "too technioal" for them. I agree. And now open a contemporary smart phone interface, and show me, without any special tooling, the actual, "physical" file system. And these things are probably the most successful consumer computing platforms ever.
  - avodonosov 3y ago
    > And now open a contemporary smart phone interface, and show me, without any special tooling, the actual, "physical" file system. Yes, I had phones in mind when writting the above :) > And these things are probably the most successful consumer computing platforms ever. Users don't have better choice in this market.

rendaw 3y ago

I don't like what Google's trying to do, but I don't think the address bar is good at of the roles it currently sits in (establishing trust, encoding state), and stands in the way of attempting new modes.

AndroTux 3y ago

Why? Most urls nowadays are unreadable and nonsensical anyway. The only thing that really matters is the domain, and that’s displayed for you in a (hopefully) better way than many users would be able to parse themselves. Of course, you should always have the option to see the full URL, but why exactly do you need that clutter on display the whole time? It’s like complaining that the browser renders HTML instead of printing it all as unformatted text.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago

I don't see the address of buildings I'm in even when I stand in front of it on the street.

guhidalg 3y ago
True, and isn't the web amazing? If your website is nice, you always know exactly where you are by looking up! If only our buildings were this nice... But seriously, what are you trying to say, that we need to make software match our contemporary physical experience? No, we can do better.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]