Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.software.firefox > #17519 > unrolled thread

Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people?

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.software.firefox

Contents

  Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> - 2026-06-29 14:04 +0200
    Re: Here we go...forgotten F9...activate the reader's view "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 20:13 +0800
      Re: Here we go...forgotten F9...activate the reader's view Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> - 2026-06-29 14:44 +0200
        Re: Here we go... Firefox's reader view "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 20:52 +0800
          Re: Here we go... Firefox's reader view "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-30 00:58 +0800
        Re: Here we go...forgotten F9...activate the reader's view "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-29 17:35 +0200
          Re: Here we go...forgotten F9...activate the reader's view "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-30 00:23 +0800
    Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? NFN Smith <worldoff9908@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 10:05 -0700
      Re: Here... Reader's VIew... Quick Filter "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-30 01:18 +0800
        Re: Here... Reader's VIew... Quick Filter NFN Smith <worldoff9908@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 12:42 -0700
    Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2026-06-29 12:32 -0500
      Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> - 2026-06-29 22:00 +0200
        Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2026-06-30 00:25 -0500
          Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> - 2026-06-30 13:24 +0200
            Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2026-06-30 12:16 -0500
              Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> - 2026-07-01 14:24 +0200
    Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Mozilla User <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-30 06:56 +0100
      Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> - 2026-06-30 13:28 +0200
        Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2026-06-30 12:18 -0500
        Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Mozilla User <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-30 23:05 +0100
          Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-07-01 08:42 +1000
          Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> - 2026-07-01 14:31 +0200
            Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 20:46 +0800
            Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? R Daneel Olivaw <Danni@hyperspace.vogon.gov.invalid> - 2026-07-01 14:47 +0200
    Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-30 21:53 +0000
      Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2026-06-30 20:15 -0500
        Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-01 01:50 +0000
      Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> - 2026-07-01 14:35 +0200
        Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-01 23:52 +0000
          Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-02 12:36 +0800
          Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> - 2026-07-04 08:41 +0200
            Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-05 03:23 +0000
              Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-07-05 09:48 -0700
                Re: Here we go again: now the Reader's View is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-08 00:14 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#17519 — Here we go again: now the Reader's VIew is gone for a lot of sites where it worked perfectly. What's wrong with these Mozilla people?

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to use it, when some
internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I can't even /try/ the
Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI
mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

-- 
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#17520 — Re: Here we go...forgotten F9...activate the reader's view

On 6/29/2026 8:04 PM, Luca wrote:
> 
> Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
> ....
> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.


Are you really using the real Firefox? Not a bogus
Firefox with the same look-and-feel?

I have no problem using F9 to activate Reader View.

Did you forget that you binded F9 to an extension
(Manage Keyboard shortcut in Extensions)?

What version of Firefox? What website(s)?


-- 

    @~@   Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
   / v \  May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
  /( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
    ^ ^   https://github.com/changmw/changmw
          The game is afoot... Meow...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17521 — Re: Here we go...forgotten F9...activate the reader's view

Mr. Man-wai Chang:

> On 6/29/2026 8:04 PM, Luca wrote:
> > 
> > Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
> > activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
> > ....
> > The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
> 
> 
> Are you really using the real Firefox? Not a bogus
> Firefox with the same look-and-feel?

Yes, 152.0.3 (64-bit) under Windows 11.

> Did you forget that you binded F9 to an extension

Oh, c'mon...

> What website(s)?

Here it graciously allows me to switch to reader's view:
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Firefox

Here id doesn't:
https://share.google/aimode/oax9xJb7VoWNzLJpv

And 1) I KNOW that it works perfectly, 2) I happily used it there till just a
couple of FF versions ago, 3) it's not up to THEM if I am allowed to TRY to
use the reader's view on ANY page. 

-- 
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17522 — Re: Here we go... Firefox's reader view

Before replying to your question:

Not all websites can be viwed using
Reader View.

-- 

    @~@   Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
   / v \  May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
  /( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
    ^ ^   https://github.com/changmw/changmw
          The game is afoot... Meow...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17525 — Re: Here we go... Firefox's reader view

On 6/29/2026 8:52 PM, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
> 
> Before replying to your question:
> 
> Not all websites can be viwed using
> Reader View.
To elaborate so I replied myself:

Reader View is NOT a WWW/Web standard.
It should be just an add-on, like
Image Block. :)

-- 

    @~@   Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
   / v \  May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
  /( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
    ^ ^   https://github.com/changmw/changmw
          The game is afoot... Meow...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17523 — Re: Here we go...forgotten F9...activate the reader's view

On 2026-06-29 14:44, Luca wrote:
> Mr. Man-wai Chang:
> 
>> On 6/29/2026 8:04 PM, Luca wrote:
>>>
>>> Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
>>> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
>>> ....
>>> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
>>
>>
>> Are you really using the real Firefox? Not a bogus
>> Firefox with the same look-and-feel?
> 
> Yes, 152.0.3 (64-bit) under Windows 11.
> 
>> Did you forget that you binded F9 to an extension
> 
> Oh, c'mon...
> 
>> What website(s)?
> 
> Here it graciously allows me to switch to reader's view:
> https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Firefox
> 
> Here id doesn't:
> https://share.google/aimode/oax9xJb7VoWNzLJpv

It doesn't for me either, and I am on 140.10.0esr (64-bit)

> 
> And 1) I KNOW that it works perfectly, 2) I happily used it there till just a
> couple of FF versions ago, 3) it's not up to THEM if I am allowed to TRY to
> use the reader's view on ANY page.

Coincidental.


-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.
        ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17524 — Re: Here we go...forgotten F9...activate the reader's view

On 6/29/2026 11:35 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

>>
>> And 1) I KNOW that it works perfectly, 2) I happily used it there till just a
>> couple of FF versions ago, 3) it's not up to THEM if I am allowed to TRY to
>> use the reader's view on ANY page.
> 
> Coincidental.


Or maybe a curse or spell was broken or cleansed? :)

CLEANSE中文(繁體)翻譯：劍橋詞典
<https://dictionary.cambridge.org/zht/%E8%A9%9E%E5%85%B8/%E8%8B%B1%E8%AA%9E-%E6%BC%A2%E8%AA%9E-%E7%B9%81%E9%AB%94/cleanse>

-- 

    @~@   Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
   / v \  May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
  /( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
    ^ ^   https://github.com/changmw/changmw
          The game is afoot... Meow...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17526

Luca wrote:
> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Before you start complaining about something not working after an 
upgrade, it's always good to take a look at how things behave with a 
default profile, with no user preference settings and all extensions 
disabled.

By my experience, if I see problems, they're almost always something 
specific to my profile, and not more generically Firefox.

Often, you can get the proof that you need by restarting Firefox in Safe 
Mode, although I prefer to keep an extra profile that is pretty much 
limited to default config settings.  If things behave correctly in 
either Safe Mode or by me running from an alternate profile, then the 
problem is with my profile.

Unfortunately, it doesn't help that so many web pages are done by 
developers that assume Google Chrome is standard, and where everything 
else is else is irrelevant and not worth caring about.  In their view, 
if things work in Chrome, it works, and if things don't work in another 
browser (especially one like Firefox that isn't Chromium derived), they 
don't care. If you don't like it, then their only response is "use Chrome".

If you run extensions, and you get expected handling in Safe Mode, then 
you have to isolate the problem extension with some trial-and-error 
work. Either start with all extensions turned off, and reenable one at a 
time, until you find which extension is causing problems when you 
enable, or start with all extensions turned off, and keep disabling 
extensions until the problem goes away.

If extensions aren't the issue, then it may be that there are issues 
with one of the underlying SQLite databases.  I've never dug into things 
at that level, but it may be that a vacuum done to compress the database 
and rebuild indexing might be necessary.  The only times I've 
encountered vacuum as a possibility is if I'm doing system maintenance 
through either CCleaner or BleachBit, but I believe that there are 
stand-alone ways of doing that, as well.

Smith

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17527 — Re: Here... Reader's VIew... Quick Filter

On 6/30/2026 1:05 AM, NFN Smith wrote:
> 
> If extensions aren't the issue, then it may be that there are issues
> with one of the underlying SQLite databases.  I've never dug into things
> at that level, but it may be that a vacuum done to compress the database
Does this explain the broken Quick Filter in Thunderbird?

Just like the Search box of File Explorer in various
versions of Windows? The Search box in the upper
right corner of File Explorer.


> and rebuild indexing might be necessary.  The only times I've
> encountered vacuum as a possibility is if I'm doing system maintenance
> through either CCleaner or BleachBit, but I believe that there are
> stand-alone ways of doing that, as well.
Firefox doesn't make use of Windows registry
in usual operation, but only in installation.
Everything needed should be in the Profile
folder. This makes it portable to Linux.

-- 

    @~@   Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
   / v \  May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
  /( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
    ^ ^   https://github.com/changmw/changmw
          The game is afoot... Meow...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17529 — Re: Here... Reader's VIew... Quick Filter

Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
> 
>> and rebuild indexing might be necessary.  The only times I've
>> encountered vacuum as a possibility is if I'm doing system maintenance
>> through either CCleaner or BleachBit, but I believe that there are
>> stand-alone ways of doing that, as well.

> Firefox doesn't make use of Windows registry
> in usual operation, but only in installation.
> Everything needed should be in the Profile
> folder. This makes it portable to Linux.

I fully agree, but I want to make it clear that in my comments, registry 
cleaning is irrelevant. I won't indulge in further off-topic on that.

For either Ccleaner in Windows or BleachBit in either Windows or Linux, 
cleaning options offered for Firefox include not just clearing cache and 
cookies (and other data that is generally safe to remove), but also 
vacuuming of databases.

In regards to OP question, I believe that lack of Reader Mode available 
at some pages is less likely to be a general fault of Firefox, so much 
as something specific to the profile being used.

Smith

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17528

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

> Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's
> View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
> use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
> can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly
> functional, like in Google's AI mode.
> 
> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader
view mode is not available.  As described below, a website may not
qualify for reader view mode.  If scoring isn't high enough to warrant
both the ability to identify the main content or properly display what
is left after discarding non-paragraphed content, what you would see
afterward in reader view mode would be worse than the original web doc.

Reader View mode extracts content, but it has to recognize there is
specific content to extract.  There must be, at a minimum, one <p>
paragraph tag around some text as a hint to see it in reader view mode,
and there must be, at a minimum, 516 characters and 7 words inside the
delineated paragraph of text (the other threshold I've seen mentioned is
fewer than 25 characters in a paragraph); else, the paragraph is
discarded.  The <p> block can be inside a <div>.  There are other
triggers to identify text blocks. <section>, <p>, <div>, and <article>
are the weighted triggers.  Each text block, or paragraph node, is
scored based on content richness: comma counts, length of the node, and
class names for the node.  Scores are added for text chunks, or
substracted for invalid parts.  A parent element has the scores of all
its sub-elements.  That is, the scores bubble up the DOM tree, but
non-linearly.  A direct parent gets the full composite score of its
sub-elements, a grandfather gets only half the score, and a
great-grandfather element only gets a third of the score.  The tiered
scoring allows the algorithm to identify higher-level elements regarding
their likelihood of being the main content of the web doc.  The score
decides if the content can be reader viewed in Firefox.

For this scheme to work well means the web doc needs to identify the
content-heavy sections, so whether a web doc reaches a threshold to
qualify for reader view mode depends a lot on how the dev coded the
page.  Some devs, for example, use <br /> to physically make content
appear to be a paragraph instead of using <p>.  <article>, <nav>,
<section>, and <aside> help to delineate different sections of the
content, and readability,js uses them to weight which nodes are likely
or unlikely (red/green weighted rating) to contain /important/ content.
Wrapping the main content using <article> and <div> gets those elements
higher scores, so readability.js can identify the main content.  If the
DOM tree is deep, tis harder to identify the main content; else, the
nodes get low scores, so the parent nodes get lower scores.

The readability function is available to any web browser as it is open
source at:

https://github.com/mozilla/readability

Some elements, like forms, are not counted in a score, and are hidden
(unscored) in the reader view mode.  Whether or not a website is scored
beyond some threshold to afford a readability view will decide if reader
mode is available.  The non-text elements are ignored, and what is left
may not score high enough to warrant a readability view that would be
mostly empty, or a scrambled mess of little text blocks remaining after
the non-text elements have been discarded, and is not the main content.
The website may not have sufficient nodes to warrant a reader view.
I've never delved into the Javascript to know exactly how all of it
tries to work through various guesstimates.

Are you trying to use reader view mode as a means of stripping out
portions of a web page, so printing or saving what's left has the
content you wish to focus on most?  If so, I suggest using the Save Page
WE and Print Edit WE add-ons.  Together those let you select which
portions of a web doc to keep or discard.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/save-page-we/
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/print-edit-we/

For example, when I want to save or print a web doc showing an invoice
for some online purchase, I only want the details of the transaction,
not all the other garbage they add to their invoice page.  I can use the
above add-ons to select the garbage I want to remove, and print/save
just the remaining content.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17530

VanguardLH:

> Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
> > activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's
> > View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
> > use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
> > can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly
> > functional, like in Google's AI mode.
> > 
> > The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
> 
> Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader
> view mode is not available.  

I did. Message-ID: <muo44ldmi7lp9aa1doi1bfdj0gnrpk89lj@4ax.com>, a few hours
before your reply.

> As described below, a website may not qualify for reader view mode. 

This is not accurate, as we all can verify for example with v.151.0.3.
Because, let's say better: a website may not qualify for what programmers
arbitrarily decided would trigger the reader's view blockade. 

> If scoring isn't high enough to warrant
> both the ability to identify the main content or properly display what
> is left after discarding non-paragraphed content, what you would see
> afterward in reader view mode would be worse than the original web doc.

So what? Let me be the judge, after all It's I who's reading the page, not
them, and I'm perfectly happy with what I see. /They/ say it's worse, but it's
not.
 
> Reader View mode extracts content, but it has to recognize there is
> specific content to extract.  There must be, at a minimum... , one <p>
> paragraph tag around some text as a hint to see it in reader view mode,
> and there must be, at a minimum, 516 characters and 7 words inside the
> delineated paragraph 
...

Are you personally involved with Firefox development? If so I apologize for my
tone and bluntness, I didn't expect to find any of the programmers here. My
point stands, though.

> Are you trying to use reader view mode as a means of stripping out
> portions of a web page, so printing or saving what's left has the
> content you wish to focus on most?  If so, I suggest using the Save Page
> WE and Print Edit WE add-ons.  Together those let you select which
> portions of a web doc to keep or discard.
> 
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/save-page-we/
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/print-edit-we/

Thanx for the hint, but I find it utterly nonsensical to force users to load
yet another add-on into FF when they are perfectly happy with native
functions. I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with it hoping they
retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.

-- 
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17531

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

> VanguardLH:
> 
>> Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
>>> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's
>>> View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
>>> use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
>>> can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly
>>> functional, like in Google's AI mode.
>>> 
>>> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
>> 
>> Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader
>> view mode is not available.  
> 
> I did. Message-ID: <muo44ldmi7lp9aa1doi1bfdj0gnrpk89lj@4ax.com>, a few hours
> before your reply.

I don't see all threads in Usenet.  I use filters to get rid of the
dross.  You gave an example website to Chang, but I filter him out.  My
comment on him is:

  Berates users asking for help, posts off-topic, gives deliberately 
  invalid "help", cross-posts to unrelated newsgroups.

I also filter out replies to untoward posters.  As you've seen, Chang is
not here to be helpful.

>> As described below, a website may not qualify for reader view mode. 
> 
> This is not accurate, as we all can verify for example with v.151.0.3.
> Because, let's say better: a website may not qualify for what programmers
> arbitrarily decided would trigger the reader's view blockade. 

Carlos said his FF 140 ESR didn't have reader mode available for your
example website.

>> If scoring isn't high enough to warrant
>> both the ability to identify the main content or properly display what
>> is left after discarding non-paragraphed content, what you would see
>> afterward in reader view mode would be worse than the original web doc.
> 
> So what? Let me be the judge, after all It's I who's reading the page, not
> them, and I'm perfectly happy with what I see. /They/ say it's worse, but it's
> not.

Go ahead and be your own judge.  Modify readability.js however you want
for whatever you decide to see.  It is not a configurable script as it
is incorporate within Firefox, so the devs had to make some decisions,
not cater to a particular user.  There is an add-on that uses the same
readability.js script:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/readability-based-reader-view/

but it appears to repurposes the same readibility.js found at the Github
website, and embedded into Firefox.  It says it supports "live editing",
so you might be able to modify whatever main content (if it can be
identified), but I don't mention of removing some content in the view.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/reader-viewer/

That one also uses Mozilla's readability.js script.  You would have to
test to see if an add-on for reader view gives you whatever you think
you want to see in a web doc.

I mentioned a different option of using using a pair of add-ons that
will let you decide just what remains of a web page, but then you will
be doing all the decisions as you wish.  You make the decisions on what
to discard, and what to keep; however, you might have to dig further
into the code than you currently understand to make those decision you
think are more correct for you.

>> Reader View mode extracts content, but it has to recognize there is
>> specific content to extract.  There must be, at a minimum... , one <p>
>> paragraph tag around some text as a hint to see it in reader view mode,
>> and there must be, at a minimum, 516 characters and 7 words inside the
>> delineated paragraph 
> 
> Are you personally involved with Firefox development? If so I apologize for my
> tone and bluntness, I didn't expect to find any of the programmers here. My
> point stands, though.

No, I'm not a dev, but I know how to research online, and only toyed
occasionally with delving into Javascript only because I had to in
resolving some issue (with an add-on as I don't dig into Firefox's code
for the scripts embedded within there).  I found programmers in forums
that were discussing how to trigger the readability.js script into
recognizing which was the main content in their web docs.  Some had
delved into the Javascript to figure out how it works, and revealed what
triggers it as to whether there will be a reader view mode, and, if so,
what to show as the most likely main content.

A lot of recognition built into readability.js depends on how well the
web dev lays out the content in his web doc.  I'm sure you know better
what you want to see (what remains in the reader view) than does a
script, but no one can code a script for specific tastes.  Mozilla could
add a lot more user-configurable options to a readability section in
Firefox's settings, but then readability.js would be oriented for use
only within Firefox rather than its intent to be usable by any web
browser or extension.

>> Are you trying to use reader view mode as a means of stripping out
>> portions of a web page, so printing or saving what's left has the
>> content you wish to focus on most?  If so, I suggest using the Save Page
>> WE and Print Edit WE add-ons.  Together those let you select which
>> portions of a web doc to keep or discard.
>> 
>> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/save-page-we/
>> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/print-edit-we/
> 
> Thanx for the hint, but I find it utterly nonsensical to force users
> to load yet another add-on into FF when they are perfectly happy with
> native functions. I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with
> it hoping they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.

Users have various wants for a web browser.  Adding a ton of code for
little-used features wastes time and manpower, and introduces more code
which could have bugs.  I turned off tracking/logistics in Firefox, and
other web browsers, for better privacy, but that's how Mozilla knows
what features their users are using.  If Mozilla sees a feature that
requires effort to code and maintain, but is rarely used by anyone, they
see little point in keeping a rarely-used feature.

As for the internal PDF viewer, yep, that's another Mozilla project at
Github, so anyone could use it in any web browser or add-on.  See:

https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js/

Doesn't Firefox still have an applications (handlers) section in its
settings where you can choose to use the Firefox's inbuilt pdf.js
viewer, or instead use an external PDF handler?  

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/choose-your-preferred-pdf-viewer-firefox
(updated 2 weeks ago)

Another way to disable the internal pdf.js inside Firefox is to go to
about:config to change:

pdfjs.disabled = true

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17534

VanguardLH:

> Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > VanguardLH:
> > 
> >> Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
> >>> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's
> >>> View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
> >>> use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
> >>> can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly
> >>> functional, like in Google's AI mode.
> >>> 
> >>> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
> >> 
> >> Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader
> >> view mode is not available.  
> > 
> > I did. Message-ID: <muo44ldmi7lp9aa1doi1bfdj0gnrpk89lj@4ax.com>, a few hours
> > before your reply.
> 
> I don't see all threads in Usenet.  I use filters to get rid of the
> dross.  

But you still write and reply as you've read all the messages of a poster. Tsk
tsk ...

> Carlos said his FF 140 ESR didn't have reader mode available for your
> example website.

Who cares? Just see by yourself, if you want to discuss the matter: 151
correctly enters reader's view with F9 with both sites, even if the menu
option is available only with one. Previous versions still offered reader's
view options in the menu as well, for both sites. With the last version they
also blocked F9, so I lost reader's view on one of the two sites that works
perfectly with it, and I had to roll back.

> Go ahead and be your own judge.  Modify readability.js 

Yeah yeah, the "if you don't like a software hack it" solution, the techie way
to tell complaining users to go to hell. 

> > I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with
> > it hoping they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.

> As for the internal PDF viewer, yep, that's another Mozilla project at
> Github, so anyone could use it in any web browser or add-on.  

You don't know what I was talking about, do you? You didn't follow the
incident.

-- 
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17537

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

> VanguardLH:
> 
>> Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> VanguardLH:
>>> 
>>>> Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
>>>>> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's
>>>>> View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
>>>>> use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
>>>>> can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly
>>>>> functional, like in Google's AI mode.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
>>>> 
>>>> Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader
>>>> view mode is not available.  
>>> 
>>> I did. Message-ID: <muo44ldmi7lp9aa1doi1bfdj0gnrpk89lj@4ax.com>, a few hours
>>> before your reply.
>> 
>> I don't see all threads in Usenet.  I use filters to get rid of the
>> dross.  
> 
> But you still write and reply as you've read all the messages of a poster. Tsk
> tsk ...

I respond to what I see, and so do you.  If I don't see a post, I won't
be responding to it like I've read it, could I?

Do you use an adblocker in the web browser?  Firefox has Disconnect.me
built in, but you can add an adblocker extension.  That's just like
using filters in Usenet to decide what is your view of Usenet.

>> Carlos said his FF 140 ESR didn't have reader mode available for your
>> example website.
> 
> Who cares? 

It showed inconsistency to your statement that reader view at the
example website worked in prior versions.

> Just see by yourself, if you want to discuss the matter: 151
> correctly enters reader's view with F9 with both sites, even if the menu
> option is available only with one. Previous versions still offered reader's
> view options in the menu as well, for both sites. With the last version they
> also blocked F9, so I lost reader's view on one of the two sites that works
> perfectly with it, and I had to roll back.

Did you ever try Smith's suggestion of testing with a fresh profile in
Firefox?  That eliminates any extensions you installed in your current
Firefox profile, any config changes, any about:config changes, and any
userchrome.css or other files that modify Firefox.  You start with a new
profile just like when you first did a clean install of Firefox.  You
don't lose your old profile, so you can still go back to it.  In
addition, disable any anti-virus or other software that may modify your
web traffic.  If using a VPN, don't while testing.

If the problem persists with a clean[er] setup, could be there is a bug
that you discovered.  However, Mozilla devs don't visit here, so this
community can do nothing to correct Firefox.  I did a search at:

bugzilla.mozilla.org

on client Firefox on "reader view" and didn't see anyone reporting the
same issue you noted.  However, I did find one entry noting "Enter
Reader View menu item is hidden instead of disabled when inapplicable",
and you mentioned Reader View was sometimes missing in the menu.  That
bug ticket was opened 5 years ago, and still has New status (no one got
assigned to it).  The bug was asking to show the menu entry even when it
was unusable rather than hide it.  The menu entry was hidden (to
effectively disable it) when readability.js didn't detect enough main
content to display in a reader view mode.  Yet you say hitting F9 (when
it worked) would bring up reader view mode.  Seems F9 was a forced mode
rather than a detected mode.  Readability.js didn't score the web doc
sufficiently high, so the menu entry wasn't changed (to show) by
altering its visibility attribute.  Possibly the F9 trigger was updated
to also reflect readbility.ps lack of a threshold score, but I didn't
see mention in the release notes.  Could be a narcissistic dev decided
to make the readbility.js score apply to both menu entry and key combo
for consistency.

Since no one seems to have yet reported the issue, you could open a bug
report at bugzilla.mozilla.org.  Take a look at other tickets to see
what is expected in the report.  You don't have to be a dev to open a
ticket.

>> Go ahead and be your own judge.  Modify readability.js 
> 
> Yeah yeah, the "if you don't like a software hack it" solution, the techie way
> to tell complaining users to go to hell. 

You were the petulant one acting entitled that some dev should be
tailoring the code to your personal tastes.

>>> I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with
>>> it hoping they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.

So, you went through the effort and time to rollback to a prior version,
but you couldn't test an add-on just because you think Mozilla should do
whatever an add-on can do.

>> As for the internal PDF viewer, yep, that's another Mozilla project at
>> Github, so anyone could use it in any web browser or add-on.  
> 
> You don't know what I was talking about, do you? You didn't follow the
> incident.

You didn't give the Message-ID of their other thread disconnected from
this one, so, no, I didn't go hunting for a separate issue from the
topic of this thread, but I did address the side topic which you brought
into this thread responding to what you said here, not what you said
elsewhere.  No one is so important to me in Usenet that I keep a bio of
their posts to review for background on what they might've said
elsewhere.

The "Enter Reader View" menu entry sometimes disappears, because
readbility.js couldn't be sure there was main content, but F9 still
forces reader view mode.  That makes the 2 methods inconsistent.  That's
why I mention trying add-ons that also use readability.js.  However, I
don't know if they usurp the F9 key, or force element.visibility=true of
the menu entry element.  From their description, you use their toolbar
button to show a reader view version of a web doc.  The addons can let
you select what part of a web doc to show in reader view instead of
processing the entire web doc.

With an add-on with its toolbar button, you don't have to rely on
scoring by readability.js to determine if there is sufficient main
content to view.  Presumably the add-on doesn't make its toolbar button
appear or disappear depending on readability.js' scoring.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17549

VanguardLH:

> >> I don't see all threads in Usenet.  I use filters to get rid of the
> >> dross.  
> > 
> > But you still write and reply as you've read all the messages of a poster. Tsk
> > tsk ...
> 
> I respond to what I see, and so do you.  If I don't see a post, I won't
> be responding to it like I've read it, could I?

You should. If you reply in a thread, expecially to the OP, at least you
should disable filters to that poster, before accusing them omit informations
that they already provided. It's *your* filter that prevents you to read
before writing. 

> >> Carlos said his FF 140 ESR didn't have reader mode available for your
> >> example website.
> > 
> > Who cares? 
> 
> It showed inconsistency to your statement that reader view at the
> example website worked in prior versions.

But he didn't say he tried with F9. And v.140 comes from one year back, it
doesn't disprove my point.

> Did you ever try Smith's suggestion of testing with a fresh profile in
> Firefox?  

Just out of curiosity, yes. It's not a profile issue.

> >>> I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with
> >>> it hoping they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.
> 
> So, you went through the effort and time to rollback to a prior version,
> but you couldn't test an add-on just because you think Mozilla should do
> whatever an add-on can do.

I could. I wouldn't. I shouldn't. In time, I will be forced to, even if it's
not necessary. That's how software should not be designed.

> >> As for the internal PDF viewer, yep, that's another Mozilla project at
> >> Github, so anyone could use it in any web browser or add-on.  
> > 
> > You don't know what I was talking about, do you? You didn't follow the
> > incident.
> 
> You didn't give the Message-ID of their other thread disconnected from
> this one, so, no, I didn't go hunting for a separate issue from the
> topic of this thread, but I did address the side topic which you brought
> into this thread responding to what you said here, not what you said
> elsewhere.  
	
Nope. You answered a question I never asked: "What is the FF internal PDF
viewer and how do I enable/disable it?". Instead, I wrote: "I hope they
retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer." Since you didn't know
about the incident but chose not to drop the argument, you could have replied:
"How did they retreat then?"

> Do you use an adblocker in the web browser? ... That's just like
> using filters in Usenet to decide what is your view of Usenet.

Nope. Usenet is not the Web. 

> Mozilla devs don't visit here, so this community can do nothing to correct Firefox.  

Yep. You know that I already knew that.

> Could be a narcissistic dev decided
> to make the readbility.js score apply to both menu entry and key combo
> for consistency.

Exactly.

> You don't have to be a dev to open a ticket.

I know, I've done it before.

-- 
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17532

On 29/06/2026 13:04, Luca wrote:
> Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
> hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to use it, when some
> internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I can't even /try/ the
> Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI
> mode.
>
> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
>

Not all web pages have a Reader View, and the Mozilla programmers make 
clear in point 1 on this page:

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-reader-view-clutter-free-web-pages.

Browsers only render pages as they are. They can't create anything out 
of thin air.

Perhaps you would care to apologise to the Mozilla programmers for 
calling them narcissists?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17535

Mozilla User:

> On 29/06/2026 13:04, Luca wrote:
> > Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
> > activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
> > hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to use it, when some
> > internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I can't even /try/ the
> > Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI
> > mode.
> >
> > The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
> >
> 
> Not all web pages have a Reader View, and the Mozilla programmers make 
> clear in point 1 on this page:
> 
> https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-reader-view-clutter-free-web-pages.
> 
> Browsers only render pages as they are. They can't create anything out 
> of thin air.
> 
> Perhaps you would care to apologise to the Mozilla programmers for 
> calling them narcissists?

I'm inclined to call you a blind and faithful follower of theirs. Blind to
what I wrote. And v. 151.0.3 is here to prove I'm right.

-- 
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17538

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

> Mozilla User:
> 
>> On 29/06/2026 13:04, Luca wrote:
>>> Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
>>> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
>>> hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to use it, when some
>>> internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I can't even /try/ the
>>> Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI
>>> mode.
>>>
>>> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
>>>
>> 
>> Not all web pages have a Reader View, and the Mozilla programmers make 
>> clear in point 1 on this page:
>> 
>> https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-reader-view-clutter-free-web-pages.
>> 
>> Browsers only render pages as they are. They can't create anything out 
>> of thin air.
>> 
>> Perhaps you would care to apologise to the Mozilla programmers for 
>> calling them narcissists?
> 
> I'm inclined to call you a blind and faithful follower of theirs. Blind to
> what I wrote. And v. 151.0.3 is here to prove I'm right.

If you've tested with a fresh Firefox profile to find the same issue is
present, open a bug report at bugzilla.mozilla.org.  You don't need to
be a dev to report bugs.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17541

On 30/06/2026 12:28, Luca wrote:
> Mozilla User:
> 
>> On 29/06/2026 13:04, Luca wrote:
>>> Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
>>> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
>>> hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to use it, when some
>>> internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I can't even /try/ the
>>> Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI
>>> mode.
>>>
>>> The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.
>>>
>>
>> Not all web pages have a Reader View, and the Mozilla programmers make
>> clear in point 1 on this page:
>>
>> https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-reader-view-clutter-free-web-pages.
>>
>> Browsers only render pages as they are. They can't create anything out
>> of thin air.
>>
>> Perhaps you would care to apologise to the Mozilla programmers for
>> calling them narcissists?
> 
> I'm inclined to call you a blind and faithful follower of theirs. Blind to
> what I wrote. And v. 151.0.3 is here to prove I'm right.
> 

As an avid user of Mozilla products, I use Firefox and Thunderbird. But 
that's not all. I use quite a few more. You can see the full list here: 
https://www.mozilla.org/en-GB/products/.

Let me tell you something else you might not know. It is the 
responsibility of website creators to provide a 'Reader View' on a 
webpage. Mozilla Firefox and other popular browsers only provide users 
with a GUI tool to make life easier. Should browser developers create 
something that isn't on the website? Is that what you are saying? Where 
would we stop? What else could browser creators provide that isn't in 
the website code?

Mozilla uses the most straightforward method, which is also web 
standard-compliant, to trigger the Reader View icon and its related 
shortcut function key.

In the link I provided earlier, point number 1 starts with:

'If a page is available in Reader View'.

Now, tell us what you think about this. You must have something to say; 
otherwise, you wouldn't be going around calling people names like a 
madman. You called them 'narcissists' and me a 'blind and faithful 
follower of theirs'. I am blind, that is true, but I am not a faithful 
follower of anyone. I'm an avid user of Mozilla products, but that 
doesn't make me a blind follower of Mozilla. I also use Edge and Chrome. 
  I use Windows 11 as well as Linux Ubuntu. Does that make me a blind 
follower of any of them? Please explain without using any expletives.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.software.firefox

csiph-web