Skip to main content

Greasemonkey Paving the Way for Frankenstein Software?

I'm not real big into Greasemonkey, and I've never written a userscript, but I love what they can do for me. Blogger drafts are posted for the time I post them, not when I originally wrote them, just like I wanted when I first started using Blogger. Gmail labels can be color coded. There is a huge array of improvements to existing webapps, and what can be done beyond that is amazing. The biggest impact is to webapps, rather than websites. The impact is both in the current set of modified apps, and in what it means for the software landscape. There have been plenty of people to suggest this, but if you haven't heard it you should consider what the greasemonkey mentality could lead to in making software fit every individual user's needs better. Firefox extensions have a lot in common, not surprisingly, sometimes altering core fundamentals of the program to tailor better for users who are frustrated with something that other user's might enjoy perfectly. This kind of pick-your-parts software customizing is going to increase, and sooner or later the developers will emprace it and we might even see webapps that function as a base and implement some more of their functionality as userscripts. What if greasemonkey started to recognize a way for websites to publish large sets of userscripts that apply to them, and you could easily enable or disable the ones you want. The application would become a channel for its own customization through external scripts, lower the bar to using the scripts drastically. Just how much development could we push into userscripts, and how much of a framework could we build out of them, to make them more stable between versions, work together more safely, and one day be able to build entire apps with them? Can the userscript concept go beyond the web? How could something be implemented for a Python or Java application?

Comments

Anonymous said…
"""
Just how much development could we push into userscripts, and how much of a framework could we build out of them, to make them more stable between versions, work together more safely, and one day be able to build entire apps with them? Can the userscript concept go beyond the web? How could something be implemented for a Python or Java application?
"""

I've been working on something along those lines. Hopefully I can start tech/prealpha releases within a month or so.

MWM
Anonymous said…
What if greasemonkey started to recognize a way for websites to publish large sets of userscripts that apply to them, and you could easily enable or disable the ones you want.

That would be so cool. I run across a lot of posts from people that don't know about the very extensive scripts that exist and dramatically change the webapp.

I'm not sure that complex web apps will embrace greasemonkey addons soon. I know that the gmail faqs take a negative/dismissive stance towards addon scripts but I don't know of any others that even acknowledge them.

Just how much development could we push into userscripts ... [could we] one day be able to build entire apps with them?

I'm rather into greasemonkey hacking, and have a particular interest in completely redesigning websites I frequent. By looking at the url structure and the basic layout of a page, it's quite possible to generate your own data feeds for websites by screen scraping the page.

The DOM isn't terrible as a screen scraping environment, there are usually a few bits of semantic info in the page which improves resilience, but you still have problems with site redesigns. Unfortunately, I get distracted and don't finish my projects.

I have a half complete redesign and had just completed the scraper when they redid the site for HTML 4.0. I got annoyed and dropped the project.

Similarly, I have a parser for oreilly's safari that can grab the full contents of a book when you hit the book index. I intended to create a nice columned layout but got distracted by work projects and haven't gotten back to it.

Alas, too many ideas. Not enough time.

As for userscripts in python programs, it seems the answer is eggs. Ian Bicking gave a talk on it at PyCon and the TurboGears project makes fairly heavy use of eggs as plugins.

Karl "grayrest" Guertin -- I refuse to sign up for a blogger account

Popular posts from this blog

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this. CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer.  One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC? It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on

The Range of Content on Planet Python

I've gotten a number of requests lately to contribute only Python related material to the Planet Python feeds and to be honest these requests have both surprised and insulted me, but they've continued. I am pretty sure they've come from a very small number of people, but they have become consistent. This is probably because of my current habit of writing about NaNoWriMo every day and those who aren't interested not looking forward to having the rest of the month reading about my novel. Planet Python will be getting a feed of only relevant posts in the future, but I'm going to be honest: I am kind of upset about it. I don't care if anyone thinks it is unreasonable of me to be upset about it, because the truth is Planet Python means something to me. It was probably the first thing I did that I considered "being part of the community" when I submitted my meager RSS feed to be added some seven years ago. My blog and my name on the list of authors at Plan

Pythonic Defined

Introduction Losing is Good Strings Dictionaries Conclusion Introduction Veterans and novices alike of Python will hear the term "pythonic" thrown around, and even a number of the veterans don't know what it means. There are times I do not know what it means, but that doesn't mean I can define a pretty good idea of what "pythonic" really means. Now, it has been defined at times as being whatever the BDFL decides, but we'll pull that out of the picture. I want to talk about what the word means for us today, and how it applied to what we do in the real world. Languages have their strengths and their idioms (ways of doing things), and when you exploit those you embrace the heart of that language. You can often tell when a programmer writing in one language is actually more comfortable with another, because the code they right is telltale of the other language. Java developers are notorious for writing Java in every language they get their hands on. Ho