From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 6/30/2026 1:05 AM, NFN Smith wrote:

If extensions aren't the issue, then it may be that there are issues
with one of the underlying SQLite databases. I've never dug into things
at that level, but it may be that a vacuum done to compress the database

Does this explain the broken Quick Filter in Thunderbird?

Just like the Search box of File Explorer in various
versions of Windows? The Search box in the upper
right corner of File Explorer.

and rebuild indexing might be necessary. The only times I've
encountered vacuum as a possibility is if I'm doing system maintenance through either CCleaner or BleachBit, but I believe that there are stand-alone ways of doing that, as well.

Firefox doesn't make use of Windows registry
in usual operation, but only in installation.
Everything needed should be in the Profile
folder. This makes it portable to Linux.
--

@~@ Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
/ v \ May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
/( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
^ ^ https://github.com/changmw/changmw
The game is afoot... Meow...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's
View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader
view mode is not available. As described below, a website may not
qualify for reader view mode. If scoring isn't high enough to warrant
both the ability to identify the main content or properly display what
is left after discarding non-paragraphed content, what you would see
afterward in reader view mode would be worse than the original web doc.

Reader View mode extracts content, but it has to recognize there is
specific content to extract. There must be, at a minimum, one <p>
paragraph tag around some text as a hint to see it in reader view mode,
and there must be, at a minimum, 516 characters and 7 words inside the delineated paragraph of text (the other threshold I've seen mentioned is
fewer than 25 characters in a paragraph); else, the paragraph is
discarded. The <p> block can be inside a <div>. There are other
triggers to identify text blocks. <section>, <p>, <div>, and <article>
are the weighted triggers. Each text block, or paragraph node, is
scored based on content richness: comma counts, length of the node, and
class names for the node. Scores are added for text chunks, or
substracted for invalid parts. A parent element has the scores of all
its sub-elements. That is, the scores bubble up the DOM tree, but non-linearly. A direct parent gets the full composite score of its sub-elements, a grandfather gets only half the score, and a
great-grandfather element only gets a third of the score. The tiered
scoring allows the algorithm to identify higher-level elements regarding
their likelihood of being the main content of the web doc. The score
decides if the content can be reader viewed in Firefox.

For this scheme to work well means the web doc needs to identify the content-heavy sections, so whether a web doc reaches a threshold to
qualify for reader view mode depends a lot on how the dev coded the
page. Some devs, for example, use <br /> to physically make content
appear to be a paragraph instead of using <p>. <article>, <nav>,
<section>, and <aside> help to delineate different sections of the
content, and readability,js uses them to weight which nodes are likely
or unlikely (red/green weighted rating) to contain /important/ content. Wrapping the main content using <article> and <div> gets those elements
higher scores, so readability.js can identify the main content. If the
DOM tree is deep, tis harder to identify the main content; else, the
nodes get low scores, so the parent nodes get lower scores.

The readability function is available to any web browser as it is open
source at:

https://github.com/mozilla/readability

Some elements, like forms, are not counted in a score, and are hidden (unscored) in the reader view mode. Whether or not a website is scored
beyond some threshold to afford a readability view will decide if reader
mode is available. The non-text elements are ignored, and what is left
may not score high enough to warrant a readability view that would be
mostly empty, or a scrambled mess of little text blocks remaining after
the non-text elements have been discarded, and is not the main content.
The website may not have sufficient nodes to warrant a reader view.
I've never delved into the Javascript to know exactly how all of it
tries to work through various guesstimates.

Are you trying to use reader view mode as a means of stripping out
portions of a web page, so printing or saving what's left has the
content you wish to focus on most? If so, I suggest using the Save Page
WE and Print Edit WE add-ons. Together those let you select which
portions of a web doc to keep or discard.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/save-page-we/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/print-edit-we/

For example, when I want to save or print a web doc showing an invoice
for some online purchase, I only want the details of the transaction,
not all the other garbage they add to their invoice page. I can use the
above add-ons to select the garbage I want to remove, and print/save
just the remaining content.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:

and-arebuild-aindexing-amight-abe-anecessary.-a-aThe-aonly-atimes-aI've
encountered-avacuum-aas-aa-apossibility-ais-aif-aI'm-adoing-asystem-amaintenance
through-aeither-aCCleaner-aor-aBleachBit,-abut-aI-abelieve-athat-athere-aare >> stand-alone-aways-aof-adoing-athat,-aas-awell.

Firefox-adoesn't-amake-ause-aof-aWindows-aregistry in-ausual-aoperation,-abut-aonly-ain-ainstallation. Everything-aneeded-ashould-abe-ain-athe-aProfile folder.-aThis-amakes-ait-aportable-ato-aLinux.

I fully agree, but I want to make it clear that in my comments, registry cleaning is irrelevant. I won't indulge in further off-topic on that.

For either Ccleaner in Windows or BleachBit in either Windows or Linux, cleaning options offered for Firefox include not just clearing cache and cookies (and other data that is generally safe to remove), but also
vacuuming of databases.

In regards to OP question, I believe that lack of Reader Mode available
at some pages is less likely to be a general fault of Firefox, so much
as something specific to the profile being used.

Smith

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

VanguardLH:

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's
View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader
view mode is not available.

I did. Message-ID: <muo44ldmi7lp9aa1doi1bfdj0gnrpk89lj@4ax.com>, a few hours before your reply.

As described below, a website may not qualify for reader view mode.

This is not accurate, as we all can verify for example with v.151.0.3.
Because, let's say better: a website may not qualify for what programmers arbitrarily decided would trigger the reader's view blockade.

If scoring isn't high enough to warrant
both the ability to identify the main content or properly display what
is left after discarding non-paragraphed content, what you would see afterward in reader view mode would be worse than the original web doc.

So what? Let me be the judge, after all It's I who's reading the page, not them, and I'm perfectly happy with what I see. /They/ say it's worse, but it's not.

Reader View mode extracts content, but it has to recognize there is
specific content to extract. There must be, at a minimum... , one <p> paragraph tag around some text as a hint to see it in reader view mode,
and there must be, at a minimum, 516 characters and 7 words inside the delineated paragraph

...

Are you personally involved with Firefox development? If so I apologize for my tone and bluntness, I didn't expect to find any of the programmers here. My point stands, though.

Are you trying to use reader view mode as a means of stripping out
portions of a web page, so printing or saving what's left has the
content you wish to focus on most? If so, I suggest using the Save Page
WE and Print Edit WE add-ons. Together those let you select which
portions of a web doc to keep or discard.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/save-page-we/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/print-edit-we/

Thanx for the hint, but I find it utterly nonsensical to force users to load yet another add-on into FF when they are perfectly happy with native
functions. I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with it hoping they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.
--
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

VanguardLH:

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's
View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly
functional, like in Google's AI mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader
view mode is not available.

I did. Message-ID: <muo44ldmi7lp9aa1doi1bfdj0gnrpk89lj@4ax.com>, a few hours before your reply.

I don't see all threads in Usenet. I use filters to get rid of the
dross. You gave an example website to Chang, but I filter him out. My
comment on him is:

Berates users asking for help, posts off-topic, gives deliberately
invalid "help", cross-posts to unrelated newsgroups.

I also filter out replies to untoward posters. As you've seen, Chang is
not here to be helpful.

As described below, a website may not qualify for reader view mode.

This is not accurate, as we all can verify for example with v.151.0.3. Because, let's say better: a website may not qualify for what programmers arbitrarily decided would trigger the reader's view blockade.

Carlos said his FF 140 ESR didn't have reader mode available for your
example website.

If scoring isn't high enough to warrant
both the ability to identify the main content or properly display what
is left after discarding non-paragraphed content, what you would see
afterward in reader view mode would be worse than the original web doc.

So what? Let me be the judge, after all It's I who's reading the page, not them, and I'm perfectly happy with what I see. /They/ say it's worse, but it's
not.

Go ahead and be your own judge. Modify readability.js however you want
for whatever you decide to see. It is not a configurable script as it
is incorporate within Firefox, so the devs had to make some decisions,
not cater to a particular user. There is an add-on that uses the same readability.js script:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/readability-based-reader-view/

but it appears to repurposes the same readibility.js found at the Github website, and embedded into Firefox. It says it supports "live editing",
so you might be able to modify whatever main content (if it can be
identified), but I don't mention of removing some content in the view.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/reader-viewer/

That one also uses Mozilla's readability.js script. You would have to
test to see if an add-on for reader view gives you whatever you think
you want to see in a web doc.

I mentioned a different option of using using a pair of add-ons that
will let you decide just what remains of a web page, but then you will
be doing all the decisions as you wish. You make the decisions on what
to discard, and what to keep; however, you might have to dig further
into the code than you currently understand to make those decision you
think are more correct for you.

Reader View mode extracts content, but it has to recognize there is
specific content to extract. There must be, at a minimum... , one <p>
paragraph tag around some text as a hint to see it in reader view mode,
and there must be, at a minimum, 516 characters and 7 words inside the
delineated paragraph

Are you personally involved with Firefox development? If so I apologize for my
tone and bluntness, I didn't expect to find any of the programmers here. My point stands, though.

No, I'm not a dev, but I know how to research online, and only toyed occasionally with delving into Javascript only because I had to in
resolving some issue (with an add-on as I don't dig into Firefox's code
for the scripts embedded within there). I found programmers in forums
that were discussing how to trigger the readability.js script into
recognizing which was the main content in their web docs. Some had
delved into the Javascript to figure out how it works, and revealed what triggers it as to whether there will be a reader view mode, and, if so,
what to show as the most likely main content.

A lot of recognition built into readability.js depends on how well the
web dev lays out the content in his web doc. I'm sure you know better
what you want to see (what remains in the reader view) than does a
script, but no one can code a script for specific tastes. Mozilla could
add a lot more user-configurable options to a readability section in
Firefox's settings, but then readability.js would be oriented for use
only within Firefox rather than its intent to be usable by any web
browser or extension.

Are you trying to use reader view mode as a means of stripping out
portions of a web page, so printing or saving what's left has the
content you wish to focus on most? If so, I suggest using the Save Page
WE and Print Edit WE add-ons. Together those let you select which
portions of a web doc to keep or discard.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/save-page-we/
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/print-edit-we/

Thanx for the hint, but I find it utterly nonsensical to force users
to load yet another add-on into FF when they are perfectly happy with
native functions. I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with
it hoping they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.

Users have various wants for a web browser. Adding a ton of code for little-used features wastes time and manpower, and introduces more code
which could have bugs. I turned off tracking/logistics in Firefox, and
other web browsers, for better privacy, but that's how Mozilla knows
what features their users are using. If Mozilla sees a feature that
requires effort to code and maintain, but is rarely used by anyone, they
see little point in keeping a rarely-used feature.

As for the internal PDF viewer, yep, that's another Mozilla project at
Github, so anyone could use it in any web browser or add-on. See:

https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js/

Doesn't Firefox still have an applications (handlers) section in its
settings where you can choose to use the Firefox's inbuilt pdf.js
viewer, or instead use an external PDF handler?

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/choose-your-preferred-pdf-viewer-firefox (updated 2 weeks ago)

Another way to disable the internal pdf.js inside Firefox is to go to about:config to change:

pdfjs.disabled = true
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 29/06/2026 13:04, Luca wrote:

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI
mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Not all web pages have a Reader View, and the Mozilla programmers make
clear in point 1 on this page:

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-reader-view-clutter-free-web-pages.

Browsers only render pages as they are. They can't create anything out
of thin air.

Perhaps you would care to apologise to the Mozilla programmers for
calling them narcissists?

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

VanguardLH:

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

VanguardLH:

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still >>> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's
View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly
functional, like in Google's AI mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader
view mode is not available.

I did. Message-ID: <muo44ldmi7lp9aa1doi1bfdj0gnrpk89lj@4ax.com>, a few hours
before your reply.

I don't see all threads in Usenet. I use filters to get rid of the
dross.

But you still write and reply as you've read all the messages of a poster. Tsk tsk ...

Carlos said his FF 140 ESR didn't have reader mode available for your
example website.

Who cares? Just see by yourself, if you want to discuss the matter: 151 correctly enters reader's view with F9 with both sites, even if the menu
option is available only with one. Previous versions still offered reader's view options in the menu as well, for both sites. With the last version they also blocked F9, so I lost reader's view on one of the two sites that works perfectly with it, and I had to roll back.

Go ahead and be your own judge. Modify readability.js

Yeah yeah, the "if you don't like a software hack it" solution, the techie way to tell complaining users to go to hell.

I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with
it hoping they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.

As for the internal PDF viewer, yep, that's another Mozilla project at Github, so anyone could use it in any web browser or add-on.

You don't know what I was talking about, do you? You didn't follow the incident.
--
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Mozilla User:

On 29/06/2026 13:04, Luca wrote:

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI
mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Not all web pages have a Reader View, and the Mozilla programmers make
clear in point 1 on this page:

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-reader-view-clutter-free-web-pages.

Browsers only render pages as they are. They can't create anything out
of thin air.

Perhaps you would care to apologise to the Mozilla programmers for
calling them narcissists?

I'm inclined to call you a blind and faithful follower of theirs. Blind to
what I wrote. And v. 151.0.3 is here to prove I'm right.
--
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

VanguardLH:

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

VanguardLH:

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still >>>>> activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's >>>>> View" was hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to
use it, when some internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I
can't even /try/ the Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly
functional, like in Google's AI mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Might help other Firefox users to give an example website where reader >>>> view mode is not available.

I did. Message-ID: <muo44ldmi7lp9aa1doi1bfdj0gnrpk89lj@4ax.com>, a few hours
before your reply.

I don't see all threads in Usenet. I use filters to get rid of the
dross.

But you still write and reply as you've read all the messages of a poster. Tsk
tsk ...

I respond to what I see, and so do you. If I don't see a post, I won't
be responding to it like I've read it, could I?

Do you use an adblocker in the web browser? Firefox has Disconnect.me
built in, but you can add an adblocker extension. That's just like
using filters in Usenet to decide what is your view of Usenet.

Carlos said his FF 140 ESR didn't have reader mode available for your
example website.

Who cares?

It showed inconsistency to your statement that reader view at the
example website worked in prior versions.

Just see by yourself, if you want to discuss the matter: 151
correctly enters reader's view with F9 with both sites, even if the menu option is available only with one. Previous versions still offered reader's view options in the menu as well, for both sites. With the last version they also blocked F9, so I lost reader's view on one of the two sites that works perfectly with it, and I had to roll back.

Did you ever try Smith's suggestion of testing with a fresh profile in
Firefox? That eliminates any extensions you installed in your current
Firefox profile, any config changes, any about:config changes, and any userchrome.css or other files that modify Firefox. You start with a new profile just like when you first did a clean install of Firefox. You
don't lose your old profile, so you can still go back to it. In
addition, disable any anti-virus or other software that may modify your
web traffic. If using a VPN, don't while testing.

If the problem persists with a clean[er] setup, could be there is a bug
that you discovered. However, Mozilla devs don't visit here, so this
community can do nothing to correct Firefox. I did a search at:

bugzilla.mozilla.org

on client Firefox on "reader view" and didn't see anyone reporting the
same issue you noted. However, I did find one entry noting "Enter
Reader View menu item is hidden instead of disabled when inapplicable",
and you mentioned Reader View was sometimes missing in the menu. That
bug ticket was opened 5 years ago, and still has New status (no one got assigned to it). The bug was asking to show the menu entry even when it
was unusable rather than hide it. The menu entry was hidden (to
effectively disable it) when readability.js didn't detect enough main
content to display in a reader view mode. Yet you say hitting F9 (when
it worked) would bring up reader view mode. Seems F9 was a forced mode
rather than a detected mode. Readability.js didn't score the web doc sufficiently high, so the menu entry wasn't changed (to show) by
altering its visibility attribute. Possibly the F9 trigger was updated
to also reflect readbility.ps lack of a threshold score, but I didn't
see mention in the release notes. Could be a narcissistic dev decided
to make the readbility.js score apply to both menu entry and key combo
for consistency.

Since no one seems to have yet reported the issue, you could open a bug
report at bugzilla.mozilla.org. Take a look at other tickets to see
what is expected in the report. You don't have to be a dev to open a
ticket.

Go ahead and be your own judge. Modify readability.js

Yeah yeah, the "if you don't like a software hack it" solution, the techie way
to tell complaining users to go to hell.

You were the petulant one acting entitled that some dev should be
tailoring the code to your personal tastes.

I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with
it hoping they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.

So, you went through the effort and time to rollback to a prior version,
but you couldn't test an add-on just because you think Mozilla should do whatever an add-on can do.

As for the internal PDF viewer, yep, that's another Mozilla project at
Github, so anyone could use it in any web browser or add-on.

You don't know what I was talking about, do you? You didn't follow the incident.

You didn't give the Message-ID of their other thread disconnected from
this one, so, no, I didn't go hunting for a separate issue from the
topic of this thread, but I did address the side topic which you brought
into this thread responding to what you said here, not what you said
elsewhere. No one is so important to me in Usenet that I keep a bio of
their posts to review for background on what they might've said
elsewhere.

The "Enter Reader View" menu entry sometimes disappears, because
readbility.js couldn't be sure there was main content, but F9 still
forces reader view mode. That makes the 2 methods inconsistent. That's
why I mention trying add-ons that also use readability.js. However, I
don't know if they usurp the F9 key, or force element.visibility=true of
the menu entry element. From their description, you use their toolbar
button to show a reader view version of a web doc. The addons can let
you select what part of a web doc to show in reader view instead of
processing the entire web doc.

With an add-on with its toolbar button, you don't have to rely on
scoring by readability.js to determine if there is sufficient main
content to view. Presumably the add-on doesn't make its toolbar button
appear or disappear depending on readability.js' scoring.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Luca <luca@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

Mozilla User:

On 29/06/2026 13:04, Luca wrote:

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to use it, when some >>> internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I can't even /try/ the
Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI
mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Not all web pages have a Reader View, and the Mozilla programmers make
clear in point 1 on this page:

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-reader-view-clutter-free-web-pages.

Browsers only render pages as they are. They can't create anything out
of thin air.

Perhaps you would care to apologise to the Mozilla programmers for
calling them narcissists?

I'm inclined to call you a blind and faithful follower of theirs. Blind to what I wrote. And v. 151.0.3 is here to prove I'm right.

If you've tested with a fresh Firefox profile to find the same issue is present, open a bug report at bugzilla.mozilla.org. You don't need to
be a dev to report bugs.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:04:11 +0200, Luca wrote:

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Not getting what you paid for? Demand a refund! (Did you keep your
receipts?)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 30/06/2026 12:28, Luca wrote:

Mozilla User:

On 29/06/2026 13:04, Luca wrote:

Until the previous FF version they had forgotten F9, and I could still
activate the reader's view on many sites, even if "Activate Reader's View" was
hidden in the View menu. Now they disabled any chance to use it, when some >>> internal sadistic stupid algorythm decides that I can't even /try/ the
Reader's View, when I know that it's perfectly functional, like in Google's AI
mode.

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Not all web pages have a Reader View, and the Mozilla programmers make
clear in point 1 on this page:

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-reader-view-clutter-free-web-pages.

Browsers only render pages as they are. They can't create anything out
of thin air.

Perhaps you would care to apologise to the Mozilla programmers for
calling them narcissists?

I'm inclined to call you a blind and faithful follower of theirs. Blind to what I wrote. And v. 151.0.3 is here to prove I'm right.

As an avid user of Mozilla products, I use Firefox and Thunderbird. But
that's not all. I use quite a few more. You can see the full list here: https://www.mozilla.org/en-GB/products/.

Let me tell you something else you might not know. It is the
responsibility of website creators to provide a 'Reader View' on a
webpage. Mozilla Firefox and other popular browsers only provide users
with a GUI tool to make life easier. Should browser developers create something that isn't on the website? Is that what you are saying? Where
would we stop? What else could browser creators provide that isn't in
the website code?

Mozilla uses the most straightforward method, which is also web standard-compliant, to trigger the Reader View icon and its related
shortcut function key.

In the link I provided earlier, point number 1 starts with:

'If a page is available in Reader View'.

Now, tell us what you think about this. You must have something to say; otherwise, you wouldn't be going around calling people names like a
madman. You called them 'narcissists' and me a 'blind and faithful
follower of theirs'. I am blind, that is true, but I am not a faithful follower of anyone. I'm an avid user of Mozilla products, but that
doesn't make me a blind follower of Mozilla. I also use Edge and Chrome.
I use Windows 11 as well as Linux Ubuntu. Does that make me a blind
follower of any of them? Please explain without using any expletives.



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Mozilla User <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

Let me tell you something else you might not know. It is the
responsibility of website creators to provide a 'Reader View' on a
webpage.

It's not something website creators have to provide. Firefox
140.12.0esr offers reader view for my website, which is completely
written by me (including the HTML), and I did nothing whatsoever to specifically accommodate it.

What some websites probably will do is design their sites _not_ to
work in Reader View, because they want to force everyone to view
them their way. But it's perfectly possible to "provide a 'Reader
View'" on your website without even trying.

I don't use Reader View in Firefox. Whenever possible I prefer the
Dillo browser and use a plugin for this adapted version of the
Firefox Reader View software to use it in that browser:

https://github.com/eafer/rdrview

I can run that on any website, since the option doesn't get hidden
like on Firefox, but sometimes you just get something like the
heading for an article but none of the article text, which probably
means the website is designed so things like Reader View won't
work. I'm guessing Firefox tries to detect those cases and removes
the Reader View option so idiots don't keep shouting "it's broken!"
at them when it's the website they're trying to access that has
broken it. But I think they should still give people a way to force
Reader View on and see for themselves.
--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Luca wrote:

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Not getting what you paid for? Demand a refund! (Did you keep your
receipts?)

Even if you wanted to pay for a web browser so it includes support, can
you find a web browser that costs money? How about a web browser for
which you can /buy/ support? Just because I've not used one doesn't
mean there are no payware web browsers, or those for which you can buy
support (for the web browser, not for an OS). I'm curious.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 20:15:00 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Even if you wanted to pay for a web browser so it includes support,
can you find a web browser that costs money?

Just find someone with the necessary chops to maintain the Web browser
code for you, and pay them to do so.

There are quite a few forks of Firefox and other open-source browsers
already; you could support one of those, or sponsor your own.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

VanguardLH:

I don't see all threads in Usenet. I use filters to get rid of the
dross.

But you still write and reply as you've read all the messages of a poster. Tsk
tsk ...

I respond to what I see, and so do you. If I don't see a post, I won't
be responding to it like I've read it, could I?

You should. If you reply in a thread, expecially to the OP, at least you
should disable filters to that poster, before accusing them omit informations that they already provided. It's *your* filter that prevents you to read
before writing.

Carlos said his FF 140 ESR didn't have reader mode available for your
example website.

Who cares?

It showed inconsistency to your statement that reader view at the
example website worked in prior versions.

But he didn't say he tried with F9. And v.140 comes from one year back, it doesn't disprove my point.

Did you ever try Smith's suggestion of testing with a fresh profile in Firefox?

Just out of curiosity, yes. It's not a profile issue.

I rolled back to 151.0.3 and I'm gonna stick with
it hoping they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer.

So, you went through the effort and time to rollback to a prior version,
but you couldn't test an add-on just because you think Mozilla should do whatever an add-on can do.

I could. I wouldn't. I shouldn't. In time, I will be forced to, even if it's not necessary. That's how software should not be designed.

As for the internal PDF viewer, yep, that's another Mozilla project at
Github, so anyone could use it in any web browser or add-on.

You don't know what I was talking about, do you? You didn't follow the incident.

You didn't give the Message-ID of their other thread disconnected from
this one, so, no, I didn't go hunting for a separate issue from the
topic of this thread, but I did address the side topic which you brought
into this thread responding to what you said here, not what you said elsewhere.

Nope. You answered a question I never asked: "What is the FF internal PDF viewer and how do I enable/disable it?". Instead, I wrote: "I hope they retreat, like they did with the internal PDF viewer." Since you didn't know about the incident but chose not to drop the argument, you could have replied: "How did they retreat then?"

Do you use an adblocker in the web browser? ... That's just like
using filters in Usenet to decide what is your view of Usenet.

Nope. Usenet is not the Web.

Mozilla devs don't visit here, so this community can do nothing to correct Firefox.

Yep. You know that I already knew that.

Could be a narcissistic dev decided
to make the readbility.js score apply to both menu entry and key combo
for consistency.

Exactly.

You don't have to be a dev to open a ticket.

I know, I've done it before.
--
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Mozilla User:

Let me tell you something else you might not know. It is the
responsibility of website creators to provide a 'Reader View' on a
webpage. Mozilla Firefox and other popular browsers only provide users
with a GUI tool to make life easier. Should browser developers create something that isn't on the website? Is that what you are saying? Where would we stop? What else could browser creators provide that isn't in
the website code?

This is the "the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away" argument. You can't provide users with a useful feature in your software, then take it back all of a sudden without even a warning and expect that they won't be pissed off.
--
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Lawrence D|Oliveiro:

On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:04:11 +0200, Luca wrote:

The narcissism of Mozilla's programmers has struck again, damn them.

Not getting what you paid for? Demand a refund! (Did you keep your
receipts?)

Aha, the "it's free, so don't complain" argument! Pure nostalgia of old times. Let me remember, how was the reply... ah yes: then, if I offer my feedback to the developer, should he pay me?
--
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 7/1/2026 8:31 PM, Luca wrote:

This is the "the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away" argument. You can't

I remember a movie line:

As one grows old, life is more taking than giving.

Forgot the exact wording. Forgot the movie name.
--

@~@ Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
/ v \ May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
/( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
^ ^ https://github.com/changmw/changmw
The game is afoot... Meow...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Luca wrote:

Mozilla User:

Let me tell you something else you might not know. It is the
responsibility of website creators to provide a 'Reader View' on a
webpage. Mozilla Firefox and other popular browsers only provide users
with a GUI tool to make life easier. Should browser developers create
something that isn't on the website? Is that what you are saying? Where
would we stop? What else could browser creators provide that isn't in
the website code?

This is the "the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away" argument. You can't provide users with a useful feature in your software, then take it back all of
a sudden without even a warning and expect that they won't be pissed off.

That is something the Firefox developers have yet to learn, along with repeatedly changing the User Interface.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On Wed, 01 Jul 2026 14:35:46 +0200, Luca wrote:

Aha, the "it's free, so don't complain" argument! Pure nostalgia of
old times. Let me remember, how was the reply... ah yes: then, if I
offer my feedback to the developer, should he pay me?

Have you done so? Remember, they expect quality bug reports.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 7/2/2026 7:52 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 01 Jul 2026 14:35:46 +0200, Luca wrote:

...

....

Are you guys and gals going philophical? :)
--

@~@ Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
/ v \ May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
/( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
^ ^ https://github.com/changmw/changmw
The game is afoot... Meow...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Lawrence D|Oliveiro:

On Wed, 01 Jul 2026 14:35:46 +0200, Luca wrote:

Aha, the "it's free, so don't complain" argument! Pure nostalgia of
old times. Let me remember, how was the reply... ah yes: then, if I
offer my feedback to the developer, should he pay me?

Have you done so? Remember, they expect quality bug reports.

I always do. You, I doubt, if you're misguided by the "you can't complain when it's free" fallacy.
--
Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at libero.it
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On Sat, 04 Jul 2026 08:41:53 +0200, Luca wrote:

Lawrence D-|Oliveiro:

On Wed, 01 Jul 2026 14:35:46 +0200, Luca wrote:

Aha, the "it's free, so don't complain" argument! Pure nostalgia
of old times. Let me remember, how was the reply... ah yes: then,
if I offer my feedback to the developer, should he pay me?

Have you done so? Remember, they expect quality bug reports.

I always do. You, I doubt, if you're misguided by the "you can't
complain when it's free" fallacy.

ThererCOs complaining, and thererCOs constructive criticism. There are
people who can make a paying career out of being professional beta
testers, their work is so good.

Is yours?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 7/4/26 20:23, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sat, 04 Jul 2026 08:41:53 +0200, Luca wrote:

Lawrence D-|Oliveiro:

On Wed, 01 Jul 2026 14:35:46 +0200, Luca wrote:

Aha, the "it's free, so don't complain" argument! Pure nostalgia
of old times. Let me remember, how was the reply... ah yes: then,
if I offer my feedback to the developer, should he pay me?

Have you done so? Remember, they expect quality bug reports.

I always do. You, I doubt, if you're misguided by the "you can't
complain when it's free" fallacy.

ThererCOs complaining, and thererCOs constructive criticism. There are
people who can make a paying career out of being professional beta
testers, their work is so good.

They (or "we") are known as Quality Assurance people. We LOOK for
errors. Our friends and families hate us. We're never invited to brainstorming meetings. Nothing is ever good enough. We're the thorn
in the side of every single entity in existence.

Except maybe Musk...
--
Cheers, Bev
"It's too bad stupidity isn't painful." - A. S. LaVey
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On Sun, 5 Jul 2026 09:48:16 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

They (or "we") are known as Quality Assurance people. We LOOK for
errors. Our friends and families hate us. We're never invited to brainstorming meetings. Nothing is ever good enough. We're the thorn
in the side of every single entity in existence.

Do you type rCL%rCY into search fields, just to see if that matches every record?

(Noise of PHP programmers scrambling to figure out why that happens.)

ObQAJoke:

QA Engineer walks into a bar. Orders a beer. Orders 0 beers.
Orders 999999999 beers. Orders a lizard. Orders -1 beers. Orders a
sfdeljknesv.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2