[SpamCop-List] Re: Marriage of Browsers????

[Porpoise]

"spamacyde" <mwnospam at comcast.net> wrote in message 
news:dmnbtp$1mf$1 at news.spamcop.net...
>
> "Porpoise" <porpoise1954 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:dmn286$sb8$1 at news.spamcop.net...
>>
>>
>> Yup! That's why you should always know what the link is before clicking
> it!
>> I *think* that's why the browser shows you that info in the status bar -
>> and, if there's any doubt, view the source............ Of course, if
> they're
>> clicking links in email .......... smack 'em round the ear!
>>
>>
>
> The point is, why should the browser allow the gibberish URL in the first
> place?
>

Because a URL *can* be gibberish - same as any text - it's down to the user 
to determine whether it's meaningful gibberish.  (NOTE: A "tiny" URL is 
gibberish, most URLs with session IDs are gibberish. There are plenty of 
legitimate URLs that are gibberish - but they are still valid URLs, so the 
browsers accept them as such).