Hi Hiltjo,
> What does it do exactly? I couldn't find a precise description,
So it purges the page from everything JS-related: <script> tags,
<noscript> tags (ugh, this one bites,) on-* event
attributes. Effectively making the page unable to execute JS while
allowing the user/browser to execute it for their purposes.
Contrast this with "JavaScript" option that disables JS entirely. A more
familiar and simple behavior, but the one that makes Surf-resident
scrolling impossible (as far as I researched.)
Quentin,
> My naive understanding is that the JavaScript engine is still active,
> as it is for the webext context.
> What this does would be to not execute remote JS code, only internal.
Exactly.
> I think that's fine, as this was kind of happening before anyway,
> and if we can remove that IPC between main and ext through
> ugly glib, the better.
Not sure I get this one. Why glib?
> - If we're going to have scrolling in main, let's remove the webext
> entirely as it wouldn't be of use anymore (we can reintroduce it later
> if needed).
> That would mean altering the Makefile too, I could do it if you want.
For me, webext is not only this scrolling-enabling thing, but also an
example for writing one's own webexts. So what we can do is removing the
scrolling code from the webext and leaving most other code (extension
initialization, page creation, message processing) intact for one to
hack on merrily.
I didn't do this, because it's quite a far-reaching change that should
better be discussed before implementing.
> - Maybe it's not really useful to disable JavaScript (the original one)
> entirely as it's needed for the core feature of being able to scroll.
> Instead, we could substitute it for JavaScriptMarkup directly.
This is my doubt too. I opted for a separately toggled option because it
seems useful (to a paranoid like me) to have a master override like
JavaScript setting in addition to *-Markup one. But that also means that
one can accidentally disable scrolling, which is not that intuitive.
But the course of action with substituting JavaScript for
JavaScriptMarkup in user-facing code (-Ss option, config examples maybe)
seems most sane to me too.
Thanks,
--
Artyom Bologov
https://aartaka.me
Received on Sun Apr 20 2025 - 17:04:42 CEST