<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Javascript custom filter action in new FiltaQuilla</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mesquilla.com/2010/05/20/javascript-custom-filter-action-in-new-filtaquilla/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mesquilla.com/2010/05/20/javascript-custom-filter-action-in-new-filtaquilla/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=javascript-custom-filter-action-in-new-filtaquilla</link>
	<description>Messaging with Mozilla by rkent</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 15:59:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rkent</title>
		<link>http://mesquilla.com/2010/05/20/javascript-custom-filter-action-in-new-filtaquilla/comment-page-1/#comment-314</link>
		<dc:creator>rkent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2010 15:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mesquilla.com/?p=788#comment-314</guid>
		<description>Hi Joe,

I&#039;m sure you&#039;re aware of the discussions that went on that disabled javascript access for emails in Thunderbird 3, even if users wanted to override that. As I understand the logic, it was that 1) javascript exploits occur on a regular basis, and need to be fixed in security updates. 2) email is too efficient of a method to distribute such exploits. 3) the vast majority of users that would enable javascript really don&#039;t understand the risks involved.

That is clearly a decision about the target audience of Thunderbird. That is, Thunderbird is targeted to be a basic email application targeting the masses, rather than an engine of innovation targeting sophisticated users. Or perhaps it is a decision that caters to a philosophy that people must be protected from their own stupidity, rather than a freedom at all costs philosophy. Regardless, I had nothing to do with those discussions, and they don&#039;t really have much to do with filters.

I would hope that the decision about javascript would be reconsided at intervals, but with the current aversion to controversial discussions, I doubt that will happen in the foreseeable future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Joe,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;re aware of the discussions that went on that disabled javascript access for emails in Thunderbird 3, even if users wanted to override that. As I understand the logic, it was that 1) javascript exploits occur on a regular basis, and need to be fixed in security updates. 2) email is too efficient of a method to distribute such exploits. 3) the vast majority of users that would enable javascript really don&#8217;t understand the risks involved.</p>
<p>That is clearly a decision about the target audience of Thunderbird. That is, Thunderbird is targeted to be a basic email application targeting the masses, rather than an engine of innovation targeting sophisticated users. Or perhaps it is a decision that caters to a philosophy that people must be protected from their own stupidity, rather than a freedom at all costs philosophy. Regardless, I had nothing to do with those discussions, and they don&#8217;t really have much to do with filters.</p>
<p>I would hope that the decision about javascript would be reconsided at intervals, but with the current aversion to controversial discussions, I doubt that will happen in the foreseeable future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JoeS</title>
		<link>http://mesquilla.com/2010/05/20/javascript-custom-filter-action-in-new-filtaquilla/comment-page-1/#comment-309</link>
		<dc:creator>JoeS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2010 03:02:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mesquilla.com/?p=788#comment-309</guid>
		<description>Hey I&#039;m all for &quot;Freedom to choose&quot;
And remote content is a good example.
But how about other kinds of content, specifically Javascript. 
Right now, it is impossible to enable JS as content within an email or newsgroup post, but on the the other hand, we can&#039;t stop it in a &quot;content tab&quot; that is; RSS or a mail start page rendering.
That doesn&#039;t seem to be quite fair to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey I&#8217;m all for &#8220;Freedom to choose&#8221;<br />
And remote content is a good example.<br />
But how about other kinds of content, specifically Javascript.<br />
Right now, it is impossible to enable JS as content within an email or newsgroup post, but on the the other hand, we can&#8217;t stop it in a &#8220;content tab&#8221; that is; RSS or a mail start page rendering.<br />
That doesn&#8217;t seem to be quite fair to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Mosedale</title>
		<link>http://mesquilla.com/2010/05/20/javascript-custom-filter-action-in-new-filtaquilla/comment-page-1/#comment-304</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Mosedale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 17:04:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mesquilla.com/?p=788#comment-304</guid>
		<description>This is hot!  If you don&#039;t already, I&#039;d be sure to mention this in the AMO page as an important feature, as I know folks have been asking for this functionality in Mozilla since we started.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is hot!  If you don&#8217;t already, I&#8217;d be sure to mention this in the AMO page as an important feature, as I know folks have been asking for this functionality in Mozilla since we started.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

