Re: [dev] [surf] next release

On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 06:20:21AM +0200, Uriel wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Anselm R Garbe <anselm_AT_garbe.us> wrote:
>> I disagree with downloads, because several stuff can't be download
>> without dealing with a valid session and it is a pain to download
>> stuff that requires session info using wget.
>
>Wget can use the browser's cookies, so in theory this should not be a
>problem, but you are probably right that I underestimated how
>braindamaged the web is and there might be sites where making this
>work would be tricky.

No, I think you're right about this one. Surf can make
provisions for an external downloader to have whatever info it
needs. The cookies file should be enough in most cases. The
entire cookie header for the domain could also be put into an
environment variable for the downloader. So should the
user-agent string and the referrer. The only possible snagging
point is POST data, which could go into an environment variable,
but as it might be quite large, it might have to go into a
temporary file instead.

>Also 'view source' is an instance of a much more general issue:
>passing the contents of the current page to an external program. This
>should be supported as this fits well with the core function of a
>browser, displaying the source of a page does not.

I agree. Not only is it useful to be able to pipe the current
page to external programs, built-in source viewers tend to suck.
It's a lot easier to just use your favorite text editor in most
cases.

-- 
Kris Maglione
A most important, but also most elusive, aspect of any tool is its
influence on the habits of those who train themselves in its use.  If
the tool is a programming language this influence is, whether we like
it or not, an influence on our thinking habits.
	--Edsger W. Dijkstra