User script support? #724
Replies: 3 comments 1 reply
-
|
I have been looking at it recently again but I'm still not sure how to get this done nor exactly what they are and how people are using them. You can already inject JavaScript manually using URLs. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Apologies for the delayed response. I'm not sure I'll be of much help, but I shall endeavor to try! Regarding what exactly they are - the answer probably varies depending on who's responding, but user scripts can be viewed through the same lens as browser extensions (there's also an easily drawn parallel with theming via CSS, but browser extensions and user scripts are nearly 1:1, so it's a more fitting comparison). Put simply, they offer the user increased control and customization of their web browsing experience. Usually it's done on a more granular/targeted level, as most frequently a script's function and ability to execute its code, i.e., act on some aspect or component of a site is limited in scope to a defined URL pattern, generally just one site or even just a single page on the site. However, there are also global scripts, but even then they're usually targeting a particular aspect of the browsing experience, e.g., HTML5 video players. IMO, "proper" browser extensions, like those found on the Chrome Web Store/Firefox Add-ons, are effectively just officially endorsed (by the browser) user scripts. Conversely, user scripts like those found at the sources below, are essentially just unofficial extensions, i.e., not endorsed by the browser itself either for any number of reasons and/or just to avoid the need of jumping through hoops, navigating red tape, and maintaining compliance, etc. Regarding the second part of your question as to what people use them for - going back to my comparison, for the same reason that there's hundreds of thousands of extensions, the reasons are too many to list, but in simplest terms, like extensions they were born out of either necessity (providing some function or feature that's lacking but achievable) or the desire to improve on something which someone not only identified as being in need of, but also "saw a better way" and had the means to bring it to life. While most user scripts that set out to add missing functionality or improve upon a website are successful in doing so, it should be noted here that just because someone identified an area in need of improvement, even if correct in doing so, doesn't mean that their attempt at improving it does, in fact, offer an improvement (either because it was an ill-conceived alternative or just poorly executed/implemented). The most frequently installed/highest rated scripts will offer obvious improvements to browsing that probably should have been included from the start and oftentimes, website operators, upon learning there's a script popular among its user base, will officially Incorporate the script's functionality. In this way, they are very much a tool that empowers users and can even effect change. There are two primary sources for user scripts, but in truth they're just tiny user.js files and easily shared / posted even in plain text format, so they can be found just about anywhere. These are just the two most popular hosts, dedicated exclusively to them:
Greasyfork is my preference but the majority of script authors upload to both, so there's a lot of overlap. They both generally do a good job of weeding out any potentially dangerous scripts. However, anyone considering their use should know that they are quite powerful or at the very least capable of being so and conflicts can arise and websites can break in the blink of an eye in the course of using them. However fortunately these conflicts and breakages are as simple as either switching the script off, modifying a few lines of code (if technically savvy), or worst case scenario uninstalling the script if necessary. Lastly, as for how you might actually achieve the inclusion of user script support in Fulguris, I can't speak intelligently/helpfully on this, however being a bit of a browser wh0re, I am well versed in mobile browsers that provide either extension or user script support and a few great examples that do the latter without being dependent on the former (and critically, are FLOSS/have available source code) that you might look to are:
Anyway, that's my time. I hope that helps! I know it's a lot but I wanted to be comprehensive. Consider it a "thank you" for Fulguris! 😋🤗 Edited to add that this is all meant only to be informative and I present for your consideration without any expectation. That is, "no pressure!" |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks for the detailed reply. Via is not open source. Kiwi is Chromium based. It's using a user script WebView integration. Even though the app is a bit broken I could try a couple of YouTube scripts from greasyfork.org that could block ads it seems. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm currently testing a userscript manager prototype. Hoping to release it this year. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I know that extension support was considered previously and it ended up being a "pass," but have you considered user script support? I suppose it's possible that you lumped userscripts together with extensions and they were passed on at the same time, but since I already wrote this far with a few more sentences in the buffer, I'm going to plow on. Userscripts strike me as less demanding/requiring less maintenance from a dev perspective (though I'm not exactly sure why I have that impression or whether it's at all accurate).
Just curious, I'm pleased as punch with Fulguris as it is and would remain so even if you never added another feature for the rest of eternity (though user script support would be welcomed gladly, all the same 😁 )
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions