Difference between revisions of "Talk:Chromebot"

From Archiveteam
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
Does [[Chromebot#Instagram.com|Instagram]] just respond with a blank page, a 403 error, 404 error or something else?  --[[User:ATrescue|ATrescue]] ([[User talk:ATrescue|talk]]) 21:52, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 
Does [[Chromebot#Instagram.com|Instagram]] just respond with a blank page, a 403 error, 404 error or something else?  --[[User:ATrescue|ATrescue]] ([[User talk:ATrescue|talk]]) 21:52, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
== How well does it handle [http://m.Twitter.com/ Twitter Lite]? ==
 +
 +
While Twitter's original desktop website still relies much on HTML source code, Twitter's Mobile page is a '''“Web ''App''”''', powered by [[Wikipedia:AJAX|AJAX]]. In addition, it causes serious compatibility problems with older versions of browsers (but Twitter redirects them to “Mobile Web (M2)”, their legacy mobile website, anyway).<br />The advantage of the AJAX-powered web-app is that allows for smoother browsing because thanks to AJAX, there is no need to reload the entire webpage. But the '''initial''' loading time takes obviously longer, because it needs to download more information into the RAM (if not already in browser cache).
 +
 +
The downside of AJAX is obvious, especially for YouTube comments. Starting circa 2013, those did no longer load '''within''' the page itself (included into HTML source code). See [[YouTube#Comment loading]] for more information. AJAX has been a death sentence for the Wayback Machine, also for other websites.
 +
<br />Archive.is has partially been able to handle AJAX content, losing it's ability to capture YouTube comments since late 2017 (except for directly linked comments).
 +
 +
<u><big>But now, there is our mighty '''ChromeBot'''. Thankfully.</U></big>
 +
 +
It is not very likely for Twitter to replace their legacy website (also known as “Twitter Web Client” in tweet source tags) with their new “App” style website (“Twitter Web App”, formerly “Twitter Lite”), but in case it actually happens, or in case it becomes the default and only users who are logged in are able to opt out, '''is ChromeBot prepared?''' …and will it support infinite scroll there too? 
 +
 +
It would be good if Twitter still gives users the choice about which platform to use. If Twitter enforced their AJAX-powered website onto all users, '''''[[ArchiveBot]],''''' (which is more mature and more suited for mass archivals of larger pages rather than [[ChromeBot]] for modern, JS-heavy pages), could be incapacitated.
 +
 +
––[[User:ATrescue|ATrescue]] ([[User talk:ATrescue|talk]]) 19:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC).

Revision as of 19:08, 30 April 2019

What exactly happens when ChromeBot tries to access Instagram's website?

Does Instagram just respond with a blank page, a 403 error, 404 error or something else? --ATrescue (talk) 21:52, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

How well does it handle Twitter Lite?

While Twitter's original desktop website still relies much on HTML source code, Twitter's Mobile page is a “Web App, powered by AJAX. In addition, it causes serious compatibility problems with older versions of browsers (but Twitter redirects them to “Mobile Web (M2)”, their legacy mobile website, anyway).
The advantage of the AJAX-powered web-app is that allows for smoother browsing because thanks to AJAX, there is no need to reload the entire webpage. But the initial loading time takes obviously longer, because it needs to download more information into the RAM (if not already in browser cache).

The downside of AJAX is obvious, especially for YouTube comments. Starting circa 2013, those did no longer load within the page itself (included into HTML source code). See YouTube#Comment loading for more information. AJAX has been a death sentence for the Wayback Machine, also for other websites.
Archive.is has partially been able to handle AJAX content, losing it's ability to capture YouTube comments since late 2017 (except for directly linked comments).

But now, there is our mighty ChromeBot. Thankfully.

It is not very likely for Twitter to replace their legacy website (also known as “Twitter Web Client” in tweet source tags) with their new “App” style website (“Twitter Web App”, formerly “Twitter Lite”), but in case it actually happens, or in case it becomes the default and only users who are logged in are able to opt out, is ChromeBot prepared? …and will it support infinite scroll there too?

It would be good if Twitter still gives users the choice about which platform to use. If Twitter enforced their AJAX-powered website onto all users, ArchiveBot, (which is more mature and more suited for mass archivals of larger pages rather than ChromeBot for modern, JS-heavy pages), could be incapacitated.

––ATrescue (talk) 19:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC).