[zottel]

I just tried out loading blocked content, and, well, it doesn't load. :-) Not with the first click, at least.

To be precise: I tried some blocked ads. None of them displayed anything when I clicked for the first time. OW shows that it's loading stuff, but then:

Some became simply blank (white; or maybe page background, I don't know) and were not clickable afterwards.

Some stayed the way the were, and after the second or third click showed the blocked ads.

I just tried loading the site without blocked URLs—and the ads were still not loaded. That was because they were all known ad sizes.

So my guess is: If the same ad triggers several blocking rules—known size blocking and/or more than one rule in the URL blocking list—only one blocking rule per click is taken away. Please fix this so that all rules are abandoned at once.

This guess doesn't explain the blank behavior, though. What could that be?

My test sites were www.macosxhints.com and http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...Objective.html. The latter one shows the "blank" behavior with the ad image just to the right of the Storage Review logo ontop of the page.

My URL blocking list:

/ad[^dm]
\.swf$
\.falkag\.
some\.ad\.com

[Len Case]

My guess is that the first block was blocking an iframe. Then when that went to load the underlying content was also blocked (flash or images or javascript).

[zottel]

Well, for some ads you have to click thrice.

And what about the "blank" behavior?

[Len Case]

Some iframes have an unsized image inside them--if the image is blocked, then it takes up no room so the white background of the frame shows thru.

As for the three clicks, I have seen iframes load iframes load iframes for ads before--try moving the mouse over the blocked content and wait for the adinfo tooltip to show up. Click, move the mouse out and back in again. See if the information has changed.

[Forrest]

I've experienced the same thing Len describes. It'd be cool [insert=more work here] if there was some way to better control how that works. Either through a panel that gives you a breakdown of the blocked content, or something similar to that.[/insert]

[Len Case]

If you really want to see everything, turn off all your ad-blocking from site preferences and then click the blocked frame (or just reload).

One option we considered when implementing click-to-load on frames was turning off all content blocking for the frame inside--however our first test page had a frame from some semi-generic site that then loaded another frame from double-click, so our thought was that we should allow our users to have a bit more control rather than going "Oh, you clicked the button--everything is fair game now".

That said, that is how we treat plug-ins. Once a plug-in has loaded (either by being clicked, or by not being blocked in the first place), it is allowed to make further requests without any blocking.

[Forrest]

That's why I'm thinking of something that gives a breakdown. Maybe even allow for the site prefs? For example, if I go to a site that is blocked because of a framing issue (say due to the third-part box being checked,) but I always want to allow that site to allow that third party content, but not others... let me pick and choose which levels of blocked content get filtered.

[zottel]

Originally Posted by Len Case

As for the three clicks, I have seen iframes load iframes load iframes for ads before--try moving the mouse over the blocked content and wait for the adinfo tooltip to show up. Click, move the mouse out and back in again. See if the information has changed.

Ah, you're right.

Has this always been the behavior of OmniWeb? I thought it was different with 5.1.3, but I might be wrong.

Personally, I'd like OW to load everything underneath when I click blocked content. If it was a mistake, i can still just reload the page and it will be blocked again. But that's just my personal opinion. Maybe make it a (possibly hidden) preference?

[Len Case]

Personally, I would be fine with loading everything underneath from a look standpoint--it was the privacy issues I was concerned about. As you say, perhaps a preference.

And you are correct, 5.1.3's behavior was different in several ways--for one, it tended to whitelist things you loaded. We have avoided that behavior in 5.5.

[zottel]

Yes, not whitelisting was actually request I sent in at that time. :-) It's good that it's not that way anymore.