[Greasemonkey] Question: what would happen if Greasemonkey sent the ID of every applicable user script with each request?

Julien Couvreur julien.couvreur at gmail.com
Thu Apr 28 16:53:49 EDT 2005


I floated a similar idea in a previous thread. One thing that this
approach is good for is raising awareness of GM from the website
owners.
I'm not sure it's that good for restoring the "balance of power"
though. Maybe a javascript variable or meta tag to disable GM on a
given page would work better for that purpose (the GM icon would
indicate the website disabled it).

I don't think that you can force publishers to either serve unmodified
content or no content at all. But at the same time, it may be useful
to include a way to disable this header (maybe globally or maybe per
website) to remove incentives for publishers for differentiating on GM
headers.

Cheers,
Julien



On 4/28/05, Aaron Boodman <zboogs at gmail.com> wrote:
> I was wondering: what would it do to the balance of power if
> Greasemonkey sent headers with each browser request announcing itself
> and each of the enabled scripts?
> 
> Publishers would not be able to disable Greasemonkey AND serve
> content. They'd only be able to decide to serve content and allow
> Greasemonkey, or to not serve content at all.
> 
> What do you guys think?
> _______________________________________________
> Greasemonkey mailing list
> Greasemonkey at mozdev.org
> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/greasemonkey
>


More information about the Greasemonkey mailing list