Archived Comments (locked)
|
|
The following is an archive of comments made before threaded discussions was implemented (November 16th, 2008) |
|
|
Two examples I would like linkified: example.com
|
|
|
I had the Linkification extension for a long while and it served me well. Upon the download and installation of Firefox 3, I lost that extension. I thank you for being there on the rebound. :-) Oh and to Some Girl: A better way to make the distinction between regular links and the Super Linkifier links is to:
|
|
|
Great script! I made one change -- directly below
So I'd have some way to tell if a link had been linkified vs. having been an actual link in the first place. (For those who aren't sure what this does: when I hover over a link, that text will appear if the script linkified it. If it was already linked to begin with, that text will not appear.) |
|
|
A lot of those links on the testcases.txt page don't work.
Firefox automatically splits long text files into multiple text nodes,
Is there any way to disable that? |
|
|
User 'sweeeetah' has posted the SuperLinkifier script with FinalDoom's name replaced with someone else's name. That's the only change. But he posted it more recently it looks like an update on the search page (already has 227 installs). |
|
|
h2oz7v, this script works wonderful with Opera. I've tested it with Opera 9.2x on WinXP.
Note: you have to use the name xxxx.users.js if you want it work in Opera. |
|
|
Is there a way of making this script work for Opera? |
|
|
Does not work for this example source code:
|
|
|
I like your ideas. Thanks for the comments. I don't have much time in college right now, but at some point I may do a complete rewrite, and be able to do some of the things you and others have suggested. |
|
|
Oops, I guess HTML comments don't work here. Let me try that a different way: "w w w . e x a m p l e . c o m" should not appear as "http://www.example.com/". |
|
|
Hi. First of all, this is an excellent linkifier. I'm using it now. A few comments on the comments: Everyone is wondering why certain patterns work here but not elsewhere. The answer is simple. Read the notes that appear when you enter a comment here: "We help break your paragraphs and link your links." (Emphasis added.) It's us.o that is creating those links, not the userscript. (If you want proof, just View Source: changes to the DOM, which userscripts make, don't reflect in the source view.) As for the issue of split text nodes, I don't agree there's nothing you can do about it. It would require modifying your code structure a bit, but when parsing a URL, you could check for a sibling text node. The only trouble is, you would no longer be able to get an One more thing: I don't like having the text content altered. So e.g. "www<!-- -->.example<!-- -->.com" should not appear as "http<!-- -->://www<!-- -->.example<!-- -->.com/". It would be nice to have an option to keep all the text as is, and only have the alterations in the But again, this is an excellent linkifier, much better than its predecessors. Thanks. |
|
|
Sorry it's been a long time. I have been very very busy, moving, out of town, etc. I searched Omerta, and it seems to work on the one with a link. It might have just been the same thing on the testcases.txt page, where firefox divides the text node right in the middle of the link. I uploaded my copy of the script just in case. |
|
|
The pic is a screenshot of the userstyles.org main page immediately after installing the script. The current link is http://userscripts.org/?page=2 |
|
|
Webb, please link to that page. I can't do anything with an image. For all I know, it's not linkifying right because the person who wrote the thing put a half link or some formatting that the script won't handle. |
|
|
i like it :) |
|
|
I have never found one of these scripts that works. |
|
|
I had it linkifying subdomain.example.com and 192.168.0.1 before but that raised issues with the things in mikeon and treymon's comments. A few of the lines on testcases.txt don't likify right because the entire page is one huge textnode, so firefox splits it into 5 or so, sometimes in the middle of a link. Nothing I can do about that-it's a rare occurance. Good idea with the [link] thing. I'll see about adding that in. |
|
|
ADDITIONAL - And yet somehow, the script linkified those strings properly here, but not on the Testcases page... Strange. |
|
|
Excellent adaptation of an excellent adaptation of an excellent script... When reviewing the test cases at http://yellow5.us/firefox/testcases.txt I found only one or two possible issues/failures/opportunities for improvement. ftp://user:password@192.168.0.1/test/. Linkified to ftp://user:password@192.168.0 irc://www.example.com/test/. Linkified to irc://www.example.com http://user@www.example.com/test/. Linkified to http://user@www.example.com As a possibly suggestion for some of the more common patterns (which do not seem to be Linkified by most of this branch of Userscripts, such as:
192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1. subdomain.example.com subdomain.example.com. Possibly allowing for a link to be inserted after them like "[link]" could prove handy (again, if able to be toggled on and off within the script itself, even if defaulting to off. |
|
|
Now, with 1.1, it shouldn't linkify anything mistaken for a URL that was presented in the comments. Ought to fix similar things in general as well. |
|
|
Updated to 1.0.4 fixing some of the things I screwed up - user:pass, parenthases, etc. Took out simple IP support. It has to have a slash now, i.e. 127.0.0.1/.
|
|
|
this also turns software version numbers into links
|
|
|
Oh, and the user:pass thing too. I think I know what's causing that, though not sure. It's been a while. I'll get it fixed as soon as I can. Sorry about that. It was working before and I screwed it up. ^^; |
|
|
Blarg. Sorry, I haven't checked in for a while. Been way too busy. Ought to have a small update out in a few days. You seriously write time and dates like that? o.O
I'll have to look at my code again and see why it is putting the parentheses into the link on that page. My initial reaction would be that the writer is using a different language that has english letters and a different paren ender. I'm not sure, though, they look the same. I'll look into it. Thanks for the bugs. ^^ |
