Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology

Re:Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology by goldenkey on Tuesday October 31, 2017 @04:46AM (#15591782)

Hijacks my back button..big no no

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology by mysterypie on Tuesday October 31, 2017 @05:41AM (#15591958)

Can someone explain to me why hijacking of the back button is even possible? It's obviously something that browsers could fix, and the fact they don't fix it means that there must be some legitimate uses. But what legit use?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology by sp332 on Tuesday October 31, 2017 @09:53AM (#15593211)

In this case I think it doesn't hijack your back button. The first page redirects to a second page, and they both end up in your history. If they used history.replaceState() then you'd only have one entry in your back-stack. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/History_API

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology by reificator on Tuesday October 31, 2017 @07:14AM (#15592342)

In a perfect world, it would be used by single page apps that are driven by JavaScript to provide the same benefits of linking, history navigation, and so on, without having to actually load a new page.

Think an online webmail client, where each time you view an email it adds a new item to your history.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology by ChrisSD on Tuesday October 31, 2017 @05:56AM (#15592002)

JavaScript apps. If you dynamically load content using js, the user will likely expect the back button to undo that change.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology by Mithaldu on Tuesday October 31, 2017 @06:57AM (#15592255)

What exactly does it make the back button do that you don't like? It seems to work fine for me.

[ Parent | on HN ]