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

Groups > comp.sys.mac.apps > #23806 > unrolled thread

Safari 8.0 gripe

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.apps

Contents

  Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-30 13:29 -0700
    Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-31 00:09 +0000
      Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-30 17:24 -0700
        Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-30 18:16 -0700
          Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-31 02:00 +0000
            Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-31 04:18 +0000
              Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-30 21:38 -0700
                Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-31 16:02 +0000
                  Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-07-31 18:22 -0400
                    Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-31 21:10 -0700
                  Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-31 21:09 -0700
                    Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-08-01 04:21 +0000
                      Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-31 22:45 -0700
                        Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-08-01 14:01 +0000
                          Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-08-01 11:00 -0400
                            Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-08-01 15:18 +0000
                              Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-08-01 11:22 -0400
                                Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-08-01 15:29 +0000
                              Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-08-01 08:36 -0700
                                Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-08-01 15:46 +0000
                                  Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-08-01 08:57 -0700
                                    Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-08-01 16:06 +0000
                                      Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-08-01 17:41 -0400
                                        Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-08-01 22:03 +0000
          Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-30 20:20 -0700
    Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-08-01 15:25 +0000
      Re: Safari 8.0 gripe Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-08-01 08:44 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#23806 — Safari 8.0 gripe

Safari 8.0 does not have a title bar.  With earlier version that do
have a title bar, you could command click on the title and get a
drop-down menu showing the hierarchy of the page, and let you quickly
navigate within that hierarchy.  I haven't been able to find out how to
do that with Safari 8.0

-- Michelle

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#23816

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.mac.apps.]
On 2014-07-30, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> Safari 8.0 does not have a title bar.  With earlier version that do
> have a title bar, you could command click on the title and get a
> drop-down menu showing the hierarchy of the page, and let you quickly
> navigate within that hierarchy.  I haven't been able to find out how to
> do that with Safari 8.0

I've never known about this feature until now. Perhaps Apple feels it
was not used much by the user base?

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#23817

In article <c3tfprF8g57U5@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.mac.apps.]
> On 2014-07-30, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> > Safari 8.0 does not have a title bar.  With earlier version that do
> > have a title bar, you could command click on the title and get a
> > drop-down menu showing the hierarchy of the page, and let you quickly
> > navigate within that hierarchy.  I haven't been able to find out how to
> > do that with Safari 8.0
> 
> I've never known about this feature until now. Perhaps Apple feels it
> was not used much by the user base?

I dunno; I used it extensively.

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

#23819

On 2014-07-31 00:24:32 +0000, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> In article <c3tfprF8g57U5@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.mac.apps.]
>> On 2014-07-30, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>>> Safari 8.0 does not have a title bar.  With earlier version that do
>>> have a title bar, you could command click on the title and get a
>>> drop-down menu showing the hierarchy of the page, and let you quickly
>>> navigate within that hierarchy.  I haven't been able to find out how to
>>> do that with Safari 8.0
>> 
>> I've never known about this feature until now. Perhaps Apple feels it
>> was not used much by the user base?
> 
> I dunno; I used it extensively.

With Safari 7.0.5 I can access a partial hierarchy with a right click 
on the actual title, and I get a full hierarchy with a left click on 
the Safari back arrow. I have to assume Safari 8.0 has navigation 
arrows.
<https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_825.jpg>
<https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_826.jpg>

-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

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

#23821

On 2014-07-31, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> On 2014-07-31 00:24:32 +0000, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:
>
> With Safari 7.0.5 I can access a partial hierarchy with a right click 
> on the actual title, and I get a full hierarchy with a left click on 
> the Safari back arrow. I have to assume Safari 8.0 has navigation 
> arrows.
>
><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_825.jpg>
><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_826.jpg>

Those are two distinctly different features though. The one Michelle
describes seems to give you a top-down hierarchical listing of the web
site, while the other is simply your browsing history.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#23825

On 2014-07-31, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2014-07-31, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>> On 2014-07-31 00:24:32 +0000, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:
>>
>> With Safari 7.0.5 I can access a partial hierarchy with a right click 
>> on the actual title, and I get a full hierarchy with a left click on 
>> the Safari back arrow. I have to assume Safari 8.0 has navigation 
>> arrows.
>>
>><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_825.jpg>
>><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_826.jpg>
>
> Those are two distinctly different features though. The one Michelle
> describes seems to give you a top-down hierarchical listing...

...of the pages you have visited on the web site.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#23828

In article <c3tudaFb7erU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> >> With Safari 7.0.5 I can access a partial hierarchy with a right click 
> >> on the actual title, and I get a full hierarchy with a left click on 
> >> the Safari back arrow. I have to assume Safari 8.0 has navigation 
> >> arrows.
> >>
> >><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_825.jpg>
> >><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_826.jpg>
> >
> > Those are two distinctly different features though. The one Michelle
> > describes seems to give you a top-down hierarchical listing...
> 
> ...of the pages you have visited on the web site.

No, it's a hierarchy of the path to the page, whether or not you have
visited them.  Some, or maybe all, of the intermediate pages may not be
accessible, and result in a 40n error.

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

#23829

On 2014-07-31, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <c3tudaFb7erU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> >> With Safari 7.0.5 I can access a partial hierarchy with a right click 
>> >> on the actual title, and I get a full hierarchy with a left click on 
>> >> the Safari back arrow. I have to assume Safari 8.0 has navigation 
>> >> arrows.
>> >>
>> >><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_825.jpg>
>> >><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_826.jpg>
>> >
>> > Those are two distinctly different features though. The one Michelle
>> > describes seems to give you a top-down hierarchical listing...
>> 
>> ...of the pages you have visited on the web site.
>
> No, it's a hierarchy of the path to the page, whether or not you have
> visited them.  Some, or maybe all, of the intermediate pages may not be
> accessible, and result in a 40n error.

Ah, interesting. I'm not sure how helpful that really is then. I doubt I
would ever use it.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#23833

In article <c3v7ldFjlk9U1@mid.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2014-07-31, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> > In article <c3tudaFb7erU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
> ><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >> With Safari 7.0.5 I can access a partial hierarchy with a right click 
> >> >> on the actual title, and I get a full hierarchy with a left click on 
> >> >> the Safari back arrow. I have to assume Safari 8.0 has navigation 
> >> >> arrows.
> >> >>
> >> >><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_825.jpg>
> >> >><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_826.jpg>
> >> >
> >> > Those are two distinctly different features though. The one Michelle
> >> > describes seems to give you a top-down hierarchical listing...
> >> 
> >> ...of the pages you have visited on the web site.
> >
> > No, it's a hierarchy of the path to the page, whether or not you have
> > visited them.  Some, or maybe all, of the intermediate pages may not be
> > accessible, and result in a 40n error.
> 
> Ah, interesting. I'm not sure how helpful that really is then. I doubt I
> would ever use it.

It seems like it's analogous to the same feature that's been available 
for ages in most applications where document windows correspond to 
files. Cmd-click on the window title would show the path to the 
document. This is mostly useful if you have documents with similar names 
in different folders, so you can see which one you have open. For 
instance, if you have documents collected into per-year folders, you can 
see which year you're currently working on.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

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

#23837

In article <barmar-D57491.18225131072014@news.eternal-september.org>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> > > No, it's a hierarchy of the path to the page, whether or not you have
> > > visited them.  Some, or maybe all, of the intermediate pages may not be
> > > accessible, and result in a 40n error.
> > 
> > Ah, interesting. I'm not sure how helpful that really is then. I doubt I
> > would ever use it.
> 
> It seems like it's analogous to the same feature that's been available 
> for ages in most applications where document windows correspond to 
> files. Cmd-click on the window title would show the path to the 
> document. 

Exactly.  BTW, it works with the menu bar in Thoth, showing the
hierarchy of open windows.

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

#23836

In article <c3v7ldFjlk9U1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> >> >> With Safari 7.0.5 I can access a partial hierarchy with a right click 
> >> >> on the actual title, and I get a full hierarchy with a left click on 
> >> >> the Safari back arrow. I have to assume Safari 8.0 has navigation 
> >> >> arrows.
> >> >>
> >> >><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_825.jpg>
> >> >><https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_826.jpg>
> >> >
> >> > Those are two distinctly different features though. The one Michelle
> >> > describes seems to give you a top-down hierarchical listing...
> >> 
> >> ...of the pages you have visited on the web site.
> >
> > No, it's a hierarchy of the path to the page, whether or not you have
> > visited them.  Some, or maybe all, of the intermediate pages may not be
> > accessible, and result in a 40n error.
> 
> Ah, interesting. I'm not sure how helpful that really is then. I doubt I
> would ever use it.

It's a quick way to get to the home page of a site when you accessed a
child page directly from a link in an email, iMessage, newsgroup
posting, etc.   That's only one example.  Here's another example:


                                   Photos
                                      |
                                      |
----------------------------------------------------
   |         |         |         |         |
   |         |         |         |         |
2000  2001  2002  2003  2004
                      |
                      |
----------------------------------------------------
   |    |      |       |       |
Jan  Feb Mar  Apr  May

And a bunch of photos on the links from the months.

You want to go from a Photo in Jan to a Photo in Apr of the same year.
You right click on the address of that photo, choose 2002, then click
on the Apr link and then the photo.

Without this method, you would have to edit the address in the address
bar.

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

#23838

On 2014-08-01, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <c3v7ldFjlk9U1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> > No, it's a hierarchy of the path to the page, whether or not you have
>> > visited them.  Some, or maybe all, of the intermediate pages may not be
>> > accessible, and result in a 40n error.
>> 
>> Ah, interesting. I'm not sure how helpful that really is then. I doubt I
>> would ever use it.
>
> It's a quick way to get to the home page of a site when you accessed a
> child page directly from a link in an email, iMessage, newsgroup
> posting, etc.   That's only one example.  Here's another example:
>
>
>                                    Photos
>                                       |
>                                       |
> ----------------------------------------------------
>    |         |         |         |         |
>    |         |         |         |         |
> 2000  2001  2002  2003  2004
>                       |
>                       |
> ----------------------------------------------------
>    |    |      |       |       |
> Jan  Feb Mar  Apr  May
>
> And a bunch of photos on the links from the months.
>
> You want to go from a Photo in Jan to a Photo in Apr of the same year.
> You right click on the address of that photo, choose 2002, then click
> on the Apr link and then the photo.
>
> Without this method, you would have to edit the address in the address
> bar.

I've always edited the address manually, and don't consider it very
inconvenient. To each, his own, though, of course.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#23839

In article <c40itnFs66bU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > You want to go from a Photo in Jan to a Photo in Apr of the same year.
> > You right click on the address of that photo, choose 2002, then click
> > on the Apr link and then the photo.
> >
> > Without this method, you would have to edit the address in the address
> > bar.
> 
> I've always edited the address manually, and don't consider it very
> inconvenient. To each, his own, though, of course.

But it entails the chance of making a typo.

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

#23842

On 2014-08-01, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <c40itnFs66bU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> > You want to go from a Photo in Jan to a Photo in Apr of the same year.
>> > You right click on the address of that photo, choose 2002, then click
>> > on the Apr link and then the photo.
>> >
>> > Without this method, you would have to edit the address in the address
>> > bar.
>> 
>> I've always edited the address manually, and don't consider it very
>> inconvenient. To each, his own, though, of course.
>
> But it entails the chance of making a typo.

Either way has disadvantages it seems.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#23847

In article <c41kuhF4ksgU1@mid.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2014-08-01, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> > In article <c40itnFs66bU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
> ><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > You want to go from a Photo in Jan to a Photo in Apr of the same year.
> >> > You right click on the address of that photo, choose 2002, then click
> >> > on the Apr link and then the photo.
> >> >
> >> > Without this method, you would have to edit the address in the address
> >> > bar.
> >> 
> >> I've always edited the address manually, and don't consider it very
> >> inconvenient. To each, his own, though, of course.
> >
> > But it entails the chance of making a typo.
> 
> Either way has disadvantages it seems.

What's the disadvantage of doing it with a popup menu?

I just tried to see if Chrome has that feature, it doesn't. I've also 
always done it by editing the URL, but it can sometimes be annoying that 
it's providing alternate completions that you have to get rid of.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

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

#23849

On 2014-08-01, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <c41kuhF4ksgU1@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-08-01, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>> > In article <c40itnFs66bU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
>> ><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> > You want to go from a Photo in Jan to a Photo in Apr of the same year.
>> >> > You right click on the address of that photo, choose 2002, then click
>> >> > on the Apr link and then the photo.
>> >> >
>> >> > Without this method, you would have to edit the address in the address
>> >> > bar.
>> >> 
>> >> I've always edited the address manually, and don't consider it very
>> >> inconvenient. To each, his own, though, of course.
>> >
>> > But it entails the chance of making a typo.
>> 
>> Either way has disadvantages it seems.
>
> What's the disadvantage of doing it with a popup menu?

As Michelle already mentioned, some of the items in that pop-up menu
often result in "page not found" errors, probably because the items
don't always have a 1-to-1 correlation with actual web pages on the site
in question, but are more of a simple dissection of the full textual URL
to the page you are viewing at the time.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#23850

In article <c41pdpF5il7U1@mid.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2014-08-01, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > In article <c41kuhF4ksgU1@mid.individual.net>,
> >  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2014-08-01, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> >> > In article <c40itnFs66bU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
> >> ><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> > You want to go from a Photo in Jan to a Photo in Apr of the same year.
> >> >> > You right click on the address of that photo, choose 2002, then click
> >> >> > on the Apr link and then the photo.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Without this method, you would have to edit the address in the address
> >> >> > bar.
> >> >> 
> >> >> I've always edited the address manually, and don't consider it very
> >> >> inconvenient. To each, his own, though, of course.
> >> >
> >> > But it entails the chance of making a typo.
> >> 
> >> Either way has disadvantages it seems.
> >
> > What's the disadvantage of doing it with a popup menu?
> 
> As Michelle already mentioned, some of the items in that pop-up menu
> often result in "page not found" errors, probably because the items
> don't always have a 1-to-1 correlation with actual web pages on the site
> in question, but are more of a simple dissection of the full textual URL
> to the page you are viewing at the time.

You have the same problem if you do it by editing the URL. That's 
neither an advantage nor a disadvantage, it's a draw. Unless you think 
the existence of something on a menu is supposed to imply that selecting 
it will do something useful.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

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

#23854

On 2014-08-01, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <c41pdpF5il7U1@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> On 2014-08-01, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> > What's the disadvantage of doing it with a popup menu?
>> 
>> As Michelle already mentioned, some of the items in that pop-up menu
>> often result in "page not found" errors, probably because the items
>> don't always have a 1-to-1 correlation with actual web pages on the site
>> in question, but are more of a simple dissection of the full textual URL
>> to the page you are viewing at the time.
>
> You have the same problem if you do it by editing the URL. That's 
> neither an advantage nor a disadvantage, it's a draw. Unless you think 
> the existence of something on a menu is supposed to imply that selecting 
> it will do something useful.

I can only speak for myself, but yes, I do have the expectation that
selecting a menu item will do something useful.

You're right that hand-editing the URL could result in the same problem.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#23855

In article <c41pdpF5il7U1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > What's the disadvantage of doing it with a popup menu?
> 
> As Michelle already mentioned, some of the items in that pop-up menu
> often result in "page not found" errors, probably because the items
> don't always have a 1-to-1 correlation with actual web pages on the site
> in question, but are more of a simple dissection of the full textual URL
> to the page you are viewing at the time.

Well, actually, it's not a "page not found" error, but a "You don't
have permission to view this page" error.  Besides, you get the same
error by editing the URL to that point.

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

#23858

On 2014-08-01, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <c41pdpF5il7U1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> > What's the disadvantage of doing it with a popup menu?
>> 
>> As Michelle already mentioned, some of the items in that pop-up menu
>> often result in "page not found" errors, probably because the items
>> don't always have a 1-to-1 correlation with actual web pages on the site
>> in question, but are more of a simple dissection of the full textual URL
>> to the page you are viewing at the time.
>
> Well, actually, it's not a "page not found" error, but a "You don't
> have permission to view this page" error.  Besides, you get the same
> error by editing the URL to that point.

The message you get when you attempt to hit a page depends on how the
web server in question is configured. ; ) For instance, if you go here:

<http://www.macworld.com/article/2459508/message-to-it-from-mac-users-tread-lightly.html#tk.rss_mac911>

...and then select this menu item:

"http://www.macworld.com/article/"

...you'll get a "page not found" error.

And yes, I mentioned in my other reply that hand-editing the URL can
pose the same problem. Naturally, you can't view pages that don't exist
or that are not allowed by the web server in question, regardless of how
you get there.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.apps

csiph-web