This message on netscape.public.mozilla.general sounds familiar, right? Look at the date...
What I hate even more about Adblock then its versioning is the fact that it hacks the extension manager to make it show the version number in this totally screwed format.
[12.01.2006 22:24] <trev> same thing with hacking the extension manager - we had a discussion on this not too long ago
[12.01.2006 22:25] <rue> changing one line of text in a dialog is exactly the domain of 'extensions', you realize
[12.01.2006 22:25] <trev> the domain of Adblock is to block ads, nothing more
[12.01.2006 22:26] <rue> 'Adblock' is a name, belonging to a project, to which you contributed
[12.01.2006 22:27] <trev> Adblock is not just a name, its your program - that's what people expect you to do
funny. another 'method' i've never understood is 2 releases a day, per MTLI..
regarding TB. every time i want to revisit it, hoping it's advanced, i'm left going back to NS7.2 email. lack of adblock would be a blocker, but for the RSS reader and not for the occasional email with ads, that's less critical imo. alas, since both are unsatisfactory, it's moot.
2. how would you block the account central stuff??? in Tb2 the new wide Message List "T" view behaves badly, so i'd prefer to block it and the 'jumping'. (Tb2 doesn't remember last viewed message on restart despite the pref being set, and a bug being open..)
Site whitelisting concept in Thunderbird is different from Firefox. In Thunderbird you whitelist mail addresses, e.g. a filter might look like @@|mailto:*@foobar.com| — no blocking will occur in mails from foobar.com then. In RSS feeds where the sender’s address is not given site whitelisting is applied to sender’s name.
A web page you open there is only an iframe inside a message, you can't apply site whitelisting to it.
2. You probably can do this with element hiding but I don't have Thunderbird 2.0 installed at the moment.
Site whitelisting concept in Thunderbird is different from Firefox. In Thunderbird you whitelist mail addresses, e.g. a filter might look like @@|mailto:*@foobar.com| — no blocking will occur in mails from foobar.com then. In RSS feeds where the sender’s address is not given site whitelisting is applied to sender’s name.
A web page you open there is only an iframe inside a message, you can't apply site whitelisting to it.
ah yes re Tb, that iframe has bitten me before. but the icon also isn't green for whitelisted Fx pages.. if it works for you, any suggestions?
In Firefox the icon it only green if Adblock Plus is completely deactivated on the page - and for this the filter has to start with http:// or https://. In Thunderbird the filter has to start with mailto: (e.g. "@@|mailto:asa|" for Asa's blog). You should try the menu, it creates the filter automatically:
it occurs to me that using @@|mailto: as the filter basis in Tb would allow for spoofing. since the header contains Website, would this be better to key on? it would depend on whether Website is always present and on whether it is also spoofable..
Spoofing is theoretically possible - but please give me a practical scenario where somebody (a spammer? a blogger?) could learn who you are whitelisting and abuse it.
well, i'm not making a claim as to its probability for exploitation, just as an item for design consideration.
for example, this feed http://ilias.ca/helpsites.xml has each post with the same mailto: but dozen(s) of different Websites. so it's just a question of whether usage in Tb is more optimal/expected based on mailto: or Website (which is what usage is in Fx).
would people prefer to import their Fx site whitelists into Tb? do people think of whitelisting in terms of sites, or possibly arbitrary From: ?
just thoughts. personally, i lean slightly toward Websites.
sadly, i think there are 2 of us using Tb for rss. it's close to being great, yet far from being usable. they need a dedicated rss person and don't have it; it's lowest on the priority list.
