IRC Log Viewer » #firebreath » 2013-03-09

IRC Nick Time (GMT-7) Message
ddddd 06:03 :-)
i got a question, please anybody help me :( can i catch with FB any GET request and block it or pass ?
im tryin to create blocker for ads %)
reichi 07:03 no, what you want to build is a browser extension
not a npapi plugin
ddddd 07:03 hm...
i need block requests by URL in any browser, in chrome i can do it via JS, there are example in chrome dev page... but i need universal method...
so npapi plugin can't do this?
ddddd 08:03 well, i need go, see you tomorrow guys :)
JuanDaugherty 08:03 sounded server side anyway
browsers don't process GET
JuanDaugherty 09:03 is JSAPi effectively a generic browser extension?
taxilian 09:03 not sure I understand the question
JSAPI is an abstraction of a javascript object
JuanDaugherty 09:03 I've never really worked with an extension, short of that knowledge I would have the comment an assertion rather than a question
*would have made
taxilian 09:03 are we talking about the JSAPI in firebreath?
JuanDaugherty 09:03 so there are others I suppose
but yeah, meant FB
taxilian 09:03 FireBreath (and all parts thereof) have nothing to do with extensions whatsoever
JuanDaugherty 09:03 nuthin? Whatsoever?
taxilian 09:03 you can use a plugin as part of any extension, but I don't count that as a link because the plugin is still just a plugin
so other than that, yes, nothing whatsoever
plugins don't know anything about extensions, except as far as they might be in a DOM created by one
JuanDaugherty 09:03 I went to a catholic university where to graduate I had to take a theology course, which I did as an independent study. The instructor keep going on about "excess" as somehow the essence of religion.
kylehuff 09:03 an extension (or add-on in mozilla) is a construct provided by the browser, unique to the respective browser. It injects javascript (via "content scripts" in chrome, "overlays" in firefox) within the context of the page/tab being rendered. Some extensions provide the option to run a background JS page that lives within the scope of the browser itself.
JuanDaugherty 09:03 and faith. To say that objects in the browser universe have nothing to do with each seems "excessive".
taxilian 09:03 to be fair, your argument to me seems excessively pedantic
JuanDaugherty 09:03 :)
taxilian 09:03 for the purpose of how you think about what happens, there is no practical relationship between the two
is that better? =]
JuanDaugherty 09:03 y
kylehuff 09:03 NPAPI plugins have no knowledge of even the existence of extensions; they operate in the same manner if loaded via a web page, or via an extension.
taxilian 09:03 yep
JuanDaugherty 09:03 you both seem oblivious to regarding these as objects from an outside perspective
taxilian 09:03 not at all
we're simply focussed on understanding how to use them and develop them
from an outside perspective nobody knows the difference anyway
JuanDaugherty 09:03 SFAICT, based the kylehuff statement FB JSAPI is in fact the basis for a generic browser extenstion
what's required is to be able generalize the concept of "browser extension"
taxilian 09:03 okay, I'm not even going to pretend to be interested in starting a philisophical discussion about terminology
in this channel, the term "browser extension" is defined as the browsers themselves do
JuanDaugherty 09:03 which carries with it the idea of specificity to a browser so there's a semantic dissonance which must be overcome in the generalization
taxilian 09:03 so a browser extension and an plugin are not at all the same thing and barely related conceptually
JuanDaugherty 09:03 *based on
taxilian 09:03 please dont' confuse things by trying to use the terms interchangeably
kylehuff 09:03 that is like saying a truck is also train is also an automobile -- they have the same basic concept, transportation, however very different implementations and limitations. We call a train something different than a car or truck, because they are used differently. For the same reason we don't refer to ourselves as animals exclusively -- we are humans, with unique traits. this label lends to our capabilities.
JuanDaugherty 09:03 no it's like saying a truck, train, and car are all motor powered vehicles
and I do certainly refer to living humans as animals
taxilian 09:03 except that in this case the term "browser extension" has already been taken, so that's like saying a truck, train, and car are all cars
there is some argument to be made to say that it's true, but only if you're actively trying to confuse people, since a train isn't a car in any sense that is useful in the discussion
JuanDaugherty 09:03 so the term "generic" is nilpotent ?
taxilian 09:03 in this case? yes
JuanDaugherty 09:03 ah
taxilian 09:03 or more specifically it just serves to confuse the issue; I agree that the terms are ridiculously overloaded, since lexigraphically they all practically mean the same thing. Add-on? Plugin? Extension? but the fact is that the terminology has been set and you have to tell them apart somehow
kylehuff 09:03 however, "plugin" implies that it is something that fills a defined hole within the application, and "extension" infers that it is an embedded arm of said application. and "add-on" is just mozilla being mozilla...
JuanDaugherty 09:03 i.e. uses it too
taxilian 09:03 heh. then IE also has "BHOs" which arguably could refer to either type...
it's just a mess
kylehuff 09:03 I don't talk about things that are dead to me.
taxilian 09:03 lol
kylehuff 09:03 seriously, I've not even attempted to create an add-on or whatever for IE. I am saving that nightmare for when I have no sanity left.
JuanDaugherty 09:03 Funny I've seen market share stats all over the place lately. One said IE was at 55%
taxilian 09:03 not in my user base
IE (all versions) combined was under 25%
it depends on who you're targeting
JuanDaugherty 09:03 I wonder if google does such stats
taxilian 09:03 anyway, I have things to get back to
we can argue about it another day =]