Re: [Usability] Re: [Epiphany] epiphany toolbar/bookmarks

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 11:45:13AM +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: 
> Yeah epiphany support smart bookmarks. There is not a way to edit the
> smart url because we thought exposing the %s thing in the interface was
> not a good idea.
> I think there are two approaches to expose the functionality:
> 
> 1 Ship with some default smart bookmarks (google and dictionary for
> example. Mantain a database like
> http://galeon.sourceforge.net/bookmarks/ and have a default bookmark
> pointing to it (maybe having the link in the docs too ?)
> 2 When the user bookmark an address like:
> http://www.google.it/search?q=word&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=it&btnG=Cerca+con+Google&lr=
> 
> Have something like:
> 
> [ ] q - word
> [ ] ie - UTF-8
> [ ] oe - UTF-8
> [ ] hl - it
> 
> etc ...
> 
> Which would allow to create the smart bookmark, but ... it's not
> exactly friendly.

To me it's OK to have optional features that only advanced users will
use; what's not OK is if important functionality is only usable by
advanced users. (I don't know if that makes sense.)

I get worried about an "advanced only" feature when it's a workaround
for a UI problem, so people who aren't "advanced" are still stuck with
the problem. Good advanced features add new functionality rather than
"curing" some perceived breakage.

Seems like scripting/macro type of stuff, which is what smart
bookmarks are, are usually add-ons rather than workarounds.

I'd think if you have a set of example smart bookmarks, and put the %s
maybe in a highlighted color, that anyone who's going to type in the
location bar to begin with would probably be able to figure it out.

It is bad to have a ton of "advanced features" where most of them are
useless, but having a few genuinely significantly useful ones makes
sense to me.

Havoc