Daniel Kahn Gillmor
dkg at fifthhorseman.net
Mon Feb 24 04:40:50 UTC 2014
On 02/23/2014 09:10 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> If we start doing this for ddg, we'd need to do this for all the others
> where it's possible. Multiplying the number of search engine and
> creating confusion to users is not the best use of resources imho.
> That being said, that's something ddg should be fixing themselves. If I
> results. With ddg, i get a useless result page. Actually, with every
> search engine we ship by default i get results, except ddg.
The two paragraphs above kind of contradict each other -- while the
separate plugin is necessary for ddg, it is *not* necessary for the
other providers, so it's unlikely that adding one would lead to a
duplication of all the other providers. That said, i understand why you
might think DDG would want to take care of it on its own.
I've asked the duckduckgo folks to weigh in on this ticket; hopefully
they can provide some feedback here.
It was pointed out to me that https://duckduckgo.com/html has the
following information in its <head>:
<link title="DuckDuckGo (HTML)"
and the referenced searchplugin at
https://duckduckgo.com/opensearch_html.xml varies from the handcrafted
one i submitted to this bug report.
iceweasel 27.0 shows this as a new search provider option in the search
box pulldown menu (below a separator) as 'Add "DuckDuck Go (HTML)"' when
i visit https://duckduckgo.com/html
So this is a possible solution for folks who use the same browser
profile regularly without HTML, if they know to look in that pulldown
from the non-js HTML page. However, it still doesn't work for folks
using throwaway profiles, whereas having it installed in /etc would make
that a permanent option, even across a new browser profile instance.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 1010 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Pkg-mozext-maintainers