Talk:Firefox3/Firefox Requirements

From MozillaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I'd like compatability with other browsers - I write web pages, like tens of millions of other people, and I do not care if competing browsers violate standards, and yours complies (or whatever else geek excuses are tabled) - but I *do* care if my web pages work. Why not step down from your "standards" high-horse, and just make my web pages work both in your browser, as well as the leading one. Thanks for listening (or, if you're to arrogant to be interested - take a collective "pluurpbh" from us 10M+ page-writers)...

I'd like to see the abiltity for a tab to be `chrooted` from the rest, or other `chrooted` tabs so that I could login twice under different accounts to my webmail on the same website, login twice under different accounts when developing a website. - DrewBroadley 9:00, 12 January 2007 (NZDT)

I really should get around to that feature request...

Q: What do FR and NFR mean?
A: FR means Functional Requirement, NFR means Non-Functional Requirement.
FR - Requirements define the internal workings, behavior or functionality
NFR - Requirements which impose constraints on the design or implementation (such as performance, security, quality standards, or design constraints).

Px: User interface for creating microformatted content. -faaborg

Feedback here is a lot more of a pain than in a newsgroup or mailing list. --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

The "Audience" section (section 2.3) is a little confusing. In particular, it seems to say that "Unlike Microsoft Internet Explorer, Opera and Apple Safari our product is open, secure, intuitive, customizable, privacy-sensitive and innovative". At least that was my initial impression from section 2.3.1. On third reading or so I decided this probably is not the impression this text is trying to convey, but that's what it reads like at first glance. --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

Sections 2.3 and 2.4 make a number of statements that I would disagree with pretty strongly. Are these meant to be statements of existing facts, or statements of what we're striving towards? I sincerely hope the latter, because they're pretty false right now. --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

What exactly does "# FR: remove local MIME type database for local applications" mean? --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

"# NFR: plugin crashes should not crash the entire application " is not likely to happent at this point, in my opinion. Not for Gecko 1.9, not unless you want to drop something else. --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

"# FR: pages should break without dividing paragraphs" meaning what? Actually implementing that sounds pretty unfortunate... --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

"# FR: print layout should look like rendered layout " again, meaning what? --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

"# NFR: printed material should match user expectations " again, meaning what? For example, how do we plan to figure out what user expectations are? What do we do when those expectations collide with the site author expectations and/or the relevant specs? --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

A useful NFR for printing, imo, would be "Make the printout look the way a good typesetter would make it look, within the constraints imposed by the site's styling". Or at least that's what we should strive for, I think. --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

"* FR: remove client-side documentation and replace with links to online documentation " -- Please leave documentation related to getting access to the network (proxies, etc) client-side (for reasons that should be obvious). --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

"Handling of back/forward with POST" -- We already do the FRs listed here, insofar as the site doesn't request that we forget the data. So I'm not sure what these are supposed to be about. The NFR is a good one -- we should have an error page for that instead. --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

Where do roaming profiles fit in here, if at all? I find not being able to share bookmarks between home from work one of the most annoying things about my daily browsing experience... ;) --Bzbarsky 19:00, 11 January 2007 (PST)

"FR: alert user when they are providing information on a suspicious website" -- Does this only apply to sites where the user has to click through anti-phishing UI to see the site in the first place? Jesse

"FR: do not offer to remember passwords when login fails" -- Firefox can't easily tell whether the login is going to succeed. Maybe it can be more helpful, such as by showing the dialog only after the form submits, or replacing the dialog with a info bar (bug 226735). But it's still going to offer regardless of whether the login succeeded; it will be up to the user to tell whether it succeeded. Jesse

"FR: protection and safeguarding against data loss" -- I think this should be a NFR. Jesse

"FR: add visual indication when Add-On Updates are present to browser UI" -- what's wrong with the current method of using dialogs for both application and extension updates? Jesse

"FR: Add-On can be installed in fewer than 3 mouse clicks" -- this worries me. Is this for whitelisted sites or non-whitelisted sites? Does the initial click on the site's button count as one of the clicks? I'm suspicious of this "click count maximum", especially one that doesn't come with a proposed UI that maintains security. I think a better FR would be "Improve the security of the installation dialog, fixing bug 363142 and bug 358266, with an eye toward simplifying the whitelist UI and reducing the number of clicks needed to install extensions." Jesse

Support for Java Console sorry for my english

English/Ingles: Actuallity the Firefox not have support for the newer version of java console (Java(TM) 2 Platform Standard Edition 5.0 Update 10 only read the plugins and show the related multimedia) for example FF not have support for the java console update 10 and IE7 have support

Spanish/Español Un problema que veo en firefox es que la versión no tiene soporte para la consola java (Java(TM) 2 Platform Standard Edition 5.0 Update 10) ya que esta no aparece en la opción Herramientas y cuando se isntala de la página oficial FF dice que no es compatible con este pero lo unico que hase al instarce instala los plugins y fire fox los lee y muesta el contendio apropiado con estos pero no se puede uar la consola con el ff, esperto que en esta versión 3.0 esto se corregido para futtas versiónes de la consola java, u mejor aun desde la versión 2.5 de ff.

File Upload


When is Firefox going to tackle the file upload issue? Its quite frustrating using/developing webbrowser apps and not having an easy way to upload files. The current interface is so trivial as to be useless. Where's drag and drop upload (a la WebDAV - a much underused standard). Simple dragging into an upload field would be a start, but better yet, someone go kick the W3C to update the standard to allow for compressed multifile uploads. This would be killer in wikis and blogs.

Just a thought, and keep up the good work! --Alexp700 09:33, 14 January 2007 (PST)

Revise Linux system requirements

The system requirements for Firefox on Linux need to be updated/revised:

  • Fx 3 depend on GTK 2.10, not 2.0
  • Has anyone actually tried Fx 3 on the 2.2 kernel?
  • The same goes for Xfree86-3.3.6.
  • Why is the memory (RAM) requirements the double than those of the Windows version? If Fx 3 requires less memory than previous versions, then the memory requirements should be updated for all platforms.
  • If the user has GTK 2.10+, he's very, very, likely to have libstdc++6. Also, in some distributions, like Ubuntu since version 5.10/Breezy, libstdc++5 isn't installed by default (and Ubuntu versions prior to 6.10/Edgy doesn't meet the GTK 2.10 requirement!).

--SamuelLB 13:27, 13 April 2008 (PDT)