"Enhancement" when adding a link in the answers

[Jelena]

It's already been pointed out before that when we select a text to add a link (URL), it should not be required to select "Insert link" from the menu. (The selected text doesn't have a link, so there is nothing to remove, which leaves only one logical option.)

But it looks like recently there was some "enhancement" in this area. Now I'm also immediately told in red letters that both URL and the text are required. Uhm... An asterisk would do, I think. And I just got here, so maybe give me a chance to enter something and only then start showing red letters? Just a thought.

After pasting the URL I have to hit Enter. Valid young Anakin's inputs are:

For cripes sake, this is a website for a technology company...

Edit - also apparently now this SCN wiki URL is "invalid": https://wiki.scn.sap.com/wiki/display/Snippets/How+to+call+functions+from+a+client+DLL+in+an+ABAP+pr...

[mynynachau]

Hi Jelena, thanks for outlining this... Unfortunately with TechEd, personally I was not aware of those "enhancements" but I understand what you are saying and already tried to investigate what the further plans on this are. For now, I wanted to let you know, that I have raised awareness on this internally with IT and am waiting for more insights. Mynyna

[Jelena]

This is a valid URL, what exactly is the validation behind this on SCN?

[Steffi_Warnecke]

Yeah, I had the same issue. I think it's the brackets. 😕

[jcgood25]

To help with shorter, more friendly URL's to wiki pages, simply press the 'K' key and you should get a popup for easy copy/paste. (much faster than using the ... button and selecting 'Link to this Page...')

Either way it would appear that the plus (+) character and percent 20 (%20) are not fully interchangeable for a space in all cases of URL interpretation...

[mynynachau]

Hi Jelena, I learned that this feature was enabled about 2 weeks ago. Its purpose is to disallow users to create links in questions, answers, comments and discussions that contain references to a sap.com page in their link text, but do not link to a sap.com page. Such links could have a malicious intention, e.g. for phishing or similar things.

[Jelena]

Scratching my head here... How does adding a message "Both URL and text are required" help with this? To me it just seems like a very odd UI design. The required fields need to be marked as such. And if any validation is performed on the input then an error message needs to be shown after the input is entered. Instead of informing the user of a mistake they have not committed yet.

"Your inputs are valid" is just useless. If they are invalid then tell me. Otherwise I don't need a confirmation.

If someone wanted to add more validations for URL that's fine but I just don't understand why it had to be implemented so terribly clumsy...

[VeselinaPeykova]

Now I am even more confused by this 'enhancement concept'.

It is fairly easy in a browser to view the link URL by hovering the mouse and paste a suspicious link in a checking website if the browser does not support phishing protection.

On the other hand if one uses a link shortener you have to expand it first (site A) and then verify it (site B), which is more time consuming.

If I understood correctly, if I use a url to a malicious site and name it for example 1007110 - How is the KWERT determined in a subtotal, it will pass the verification with flying colors.

Some of the most typical cases when people change link texts is to use the title of a SAP note or ABAP Keyword Documentation topic.

[mynynachau]

Agree. The messages surely need refinement. Maybe an asterisk would be sufficient. I will take this to IT and ask for enhancements. 🙂

[mynynachau]

Hi Veselina, I didn't mean to confuse you 🙂 Those are great points, it's also good to know about the most typical cases, which I would like to take to the discussion with IT. Thank you! 🙂