Remove "Open in new window" link option

[ellatrix]

Description

Fixes #4571. Reverts #2628.

How Has This Been Tested?

Ensure the link pop up has no advanced settings.

Checklist:

• My code is tested.
• My code follows the WordPress code style.
• My code has proper inline documentation.

[notnownikki]

🚀

[ellatrix]

Thank you @notnownikki!

[paaljoachim]

Hmm I remember a year or so ago we had a discussion about removing the Open a New Link in the TinyMCE editor but a few of us complained about it and it was in the end not removed.

I noticed the post on make core that Open a New Window link has been removed. I run a tutorial web site and link to a lot of resources at the bottom of my tutorials. I open all the resource links in new windows. So that a person can continue reading the tutorial but have the additional window open to check out some of the resources in a simple way without having to back-fort and having to copy the link to manually open a window. It would be good to have the option in place.
Thanks.

[ellatrix]

I open all the resource links in new windows. So that a person can continue reading the tutorial but have the additional window open to check out some of the resources in a simple way without having to back-fort and having to copy the link to manually open a window.

In that case it should be up to the user to decide that, not you. The user can right click the link and choose "Open in Link in New Tab" or press Cmd while clicking the link (not sure what the Windows equivalent is). If you add target="_blank", you remove the options the user has and force one on them.

[karmatosed]

In that case it should be up to the user to decide that, not you. The user can right click the link and choose "Open in Link in New Tab" or press Cmd while clicking the link (not sure what the Windows equivalent is). If you add target="_blank", you remove the options the user has and force one on them.

This is a very important point and takes the power back to the user over hijacking their experience.

[paaljoachim]

Well I made my tutorial site as a kind of online diary of WordPress tutorials mainly for myself but I also like to share them with others. There are some tutorials that just have lots of links to resources and for me it is most useful to have a new browser tab open out to external links.

[ChrisEdwardsCE]

A few good reasons as to why this should not be implemented:

• Link leads to a document or file. If you link to a PDF or MP3 or a different type of file, you most likely want to apply this to open in a new window.
• Sometimes interruption on a page could cause the loss of a sale. For example, opening terms of service or even a help document.

I feel this is a step backward in the ultimate goal of Gutenberg becoming a "better" option, however, just ads to the issue of too many plugins being added to do something that should be in core. I believe this should be relooked at.

[jb510]

I fully respect there is a faction that feels target="_blank" is bad and should be purged from the internet. I am one of those people, it's an argument I've had with site owners many many times as they insist they need links to open in a new window.

Here's the problem, this is a valid HTML spec and it is one that individual authors and site owners should rightfully be able to choose to use.

Quite simply you are taking power away from content owners based on your opinion and philosophy.

[ellatrix]

You can still add it and are still free to do so. We won't and shouldn't remove it from the HTML. It's just not part of the default UI.

Link leads to a document or file. If you link to a PDF or MP3 or a different type of file, you most likely want to apply this to open in a new window.

Most likely why?

Sometimes interruption on a page could cause the loss of a sale. For example, opening terms of service or even a help document.

How do you remember to add this to all links in content that is part of a sales page? It sounds again like you'd be better of with a content filter to make sure all links are handled?

[kevinwhoffman]

There's an underlying assumption that removing the convenience of opening links in new tabs will actually stop people from wanting to open links in new tabs. Users will not suddenly realize that it can be an anti-pattern just because they can't find the control. Furthermore it inconveniences those who do have a legitimate use case for it.

Perhaps most unfortunate is the fact that users will end up manually adding target="_blank" and they will likely be unaware of the security implications if they do not also add rel="noopener noreferrer".

https://www.jitbit.com/alexblog/256-targetblank---the-most-underestimated-vulnerability-ever/

[webdados]

@jb510 said it all:
"this is a valid HTML spec and it is one that individual authors and site owners should rightfully be able to choose to use.
Quite simply you are taking power away from content owners based on your opinion and philosophy."

[Volnus]

I am in agreement with @kevinwhoffman just because the option is removed does not mean are not going to want to have links open in another window. There are many use cases where people like to have links open in other windows for instance if they are going to a page to download files, and following a tutorial etc.

By removing the option for target="_blank" as Kevin stated users who are less educated on the topic won't add the proper rel noopener and noreferrer tags possibly leading to security issues.

I think from an editorial and writing perspective the removal of this feature yields no gain, its not improving performance, nor user experience, there is no benefit to removing a commonly used standard that is used quite often.

[webdados]

Sorry for the sarcasm, but this is just a proof that it's possible to turn the "Add link" feature even worst than the one we have since WordPress 4.5.

[notnownikki]

My mind has changed on this. People who want to make the new tab happen are going to make it happen anyway. Without this option, they could make it happen in an insecure way.

[alvarogois]

I understand the need to give power back to the user. But, in the end, content is being produced by someone, someone that may want to easily decide if a link should or shouldn't open in a new window (and it would be better to do so simply and safely), as it may influence the reading experience – as pointed above. Instead of worshiping the user and punish the bad content creator, maybe we should grant this one the possibility of learning good practices, free will, self-determination.

[ellatrix]

There's an underlying assumption that removing the convenience of opening links in new tabs will actually stop people from wanting to open links in new tabs. Users will not suddenly realize that it can be an anti-pattern just because they can't find the control. Furthermore it inconveniences those who do have a legitimate use case for it.

There's also the assumption that a significant amount of people will want to have this option or will insist on having it. I don't think that's true.

Perhaps most unfortunate is the fact that users will end up manually adding target="_blank" and they will likely be unaware of the security implications if they do not also add rel="noopener noreferrer".

By removing the option for target="_blank" as Kevin stated users who are less educated on the topic won't add the proper rel noopener and noreferrer tags possibly leading to security issues.

That's easily solved by adding a content filter for target="_blank" to add the rel attribute in WordPress Core, which we would need anyway because the user can still remove it from the HTML.

[alvarogois]

There's also the assumption that a significant amount of people will want to have this option or will insist on having it. I don't think that's true.

Do you have concrete data on this @iseulde?

[ellatrix]

Do you have concrete data on this @iseulde?

No, but I don't have concrete data on the opposite either.

[notnownikki]

That's easily solved by adding a content filter for target="_blank" to add the rel attribute in WordPress Core

Then my issue with it goes away :) It's still possible to have this behaviour, and if we have that content filter, non-technical users won't be making it happen in an insecure way.

[webdados]

Are we removing a feature that WordPress has since it's launch, 15 years ago, (correct me if I'm wrong) based on assumptions and a need to teach the WordPress users a doctrine?

That's easily solved by adding a content filter for target="_blank" to add the rel attribute in WordPress Core, which we would need anyway because the user can still remove it from the HTML.

So, we remove the feature and then we insert filters to make sure that the people that decided they want to use that feature can't do it the wrong way?

[webdados]

non-technical users won't be making it happen in an insecure way

Non-technical users need a GUI.

[karmatosed]

I think we have to be careful to use terms like 'valid HTML spec' as a reason to keep in something that for the majority of users is not a great experience. I've seen the unwanted surprise having this feature in can give a user. Many in this thread are even saying 'yes we agree it's not a great experience'. Shouldn't we should be trying to bring the best experience, not all the experiences.

I +1 adding the content filter as that seems super smart and a way we protect without having the setting.

[webdados]

The problem with adding a warning message is that we're opening a Pandora box to have warning messages all over the WordPress backend, which has been (correctly) avoided until now.

[afercia]

Good practices are not laws written in stone, and it is not up to us to force users to implement them

I'd argue it is not up to us to take control of the users browser 🙂 It has been something like 15 years that browsers have implemented tabbed navigation. Users can open links in a new tab or window whenever they want to do so. As said, there are legitimate cases where target="_blank" makes sense and should be used. That said, I totally agree on the necessary parsimony to use in these cases.

[StaggerLeee]

Amazed how Gutenberg team can overdo and complicate things. All to "convince" people in their truth.
Make one new GUI option in Link block for target="_blank". And hide it unless activated with prepared filter in functions.php.

People like links opening in new tab or not. In both cases they survive easily. They do not need babysitting.

What is a deal, do not get it ? Are you removing functions.php now too ?

[StaggerLeee]

And again this obsession with Info messages. Cool for User first 2-3 days, deadly boring next 10 years. And just taking screen space.

If any of you are using browser addons, and I bet most of you do. See in browser top-right part, click on addons icons, and tell Us if you see any Info messages of this sort whatsoever.

[alvarogois]

@afercia: we're not talking about the readers, they're not the ones using Gutenberg. We're discussing publishers, the ones that create content. It's up to them to decide if they want to follow good practices and when, not us. Your argument about tabbed browsing and users opening links in new tabs works both ways… In fact, if we believe that people can and know how to open links in new tabs, we must also believe that publishers can and know when to use this option.

[alvarogois]

@webdados, I'm inclined to agree with you and @StaggerLeee on the warning message thing.

[StaggerLeee]

I told them, those things are for question/exclamation mark small icon and modals. As some form fields have Info and explanations. But OK now, offtopic.

[Stiofan]

The main argument for removing this seems to be "it should be the users decision" and at the same time this is also being used:

"Every time you give a user an option, you are asking them to make a decision. When a user doesn’t care or understand the option this ultimately leads to frustration. "

Im my experience most website users don't even know how to open a link in a new window which goes against both arguments..

If this is about accessability, maybe the browsers should implement a feature that if a back button is clicked in a new tab it closes the tab...

[webdados]

"(...) When a user doesn’t care or understand the option this ultimately leads to frustration"

Except that everyone that publishes on WordPress know what "Open in new window" is :-)

[Stiofan]

That kinda backs up my point, if as u say "everyone" publishing on WP knows what that option is for then again that argument is invalid... what we do know is not everyone using the website knows how to open a link in a new tab, so that argument actually goes againt removing the option.. :)

[maximebj]

Hi, here are my two cents about this :

I'm writing courses. My user follow a pathway from lesson to lesson. I don't want to distract them from this main path, so when I'm linking to another lesson for reference, or another website, it's useful to do it in a new tab to avoid loosing the current pathway.

I'm not sure why there is so much debate here. I've trained more than 500 WordPress beginners, and even if a lot of them encoutered some issues to understand some concepts, neither of them ad trouble understanding the "new tab" option. But only few of them know the CMD+Click shortcut.

I also think than "new tab" is more accurate than "new window".

[webdados]

@Stiofan

that argument actually goes againt removing the option

I know. I'm against it being removed :-)

[2ndkauboy]

I had the same idea as @karmatosed and thinks it's a good solution. We can make sure that if a publisher sets a link to open in a new tab, it's done in a safe way (rel="noopener") and in an accessible way as @afercia has mentioned. Showing a warning is stilla good idea, because too many publishers do open links in new tabs for the wrong reason - in my opinion ;)

[StaggerLeee]

Just last night became aware you have "open in new tab" option on WordPress support forum.
Who are you kidding, and why. :)

[webdados]

I think this issue is being left dormant and will end up not being resolved. A large number of "day-to-day" WordPress users will not be happy when they realize that this option has been removed.

[jb510]

I had the same idea as @karmatosed and thinks it's a good solution. We can make sure that if a publisher sets a link to open in a new tab, it's done in a safe way (rel="noopener") and in an accessible way as @afercia has mentioned. Showing a warning is stilla good idea, because too many publishers do open links in new tabs for the wrong reason - in my opinion ;)

I’ve considered this for a couple weeks, done a bit of WCAG reading and my opinion has shifted a little. I still think removing this feature from WP is the wrong direction, but hear me out.

WP should be making publishing accessibly easier for publishers. To me that means giving publishers easy to use tools to be compliant, not taking away tools that don’t comply.

Reading WCAG G200 and G201 it’s clear the guildline is to “warn readers when opening in a new tab”, not “never open in a new tab”.

There should be a warning built in, but not targeted at the publisher saying “don’t do this” the warning should be targeted at the reader. I feel a far surprior solution here would be to make publishers giving readers that WCAG recommended warning easier.

When open in new tab is choosen Gutenberg should automate inserting a visual indicator with tooltip that reads “opens in new window” and insert text in a way that will be read oulpud by screen readers indicating this (see examples on above WCAG links).

As I said before the first principle should be empowering publishers to do things the right way. Removing useful tools only frustrates WP users and perpetuates this myth that WP devs
I’ve in an ivory tower unconcerned with th real day to day needs of publishers. Instead lets build “better decisions” into the tools and make both publishers and readers happier at the same time.

[webdados]

@jb510 while I agree with you that the visitor should be warned, and not the publisher, enforcing this would require loading some JS and/or CSS that would need to be compatible with all the themes out there.

I think this kind of warnings is a browser job, not the website itself. (but I might be wrong, of course)

[richardkentgates]

This issue has been decided by W3C, which is the governing body of web standards. Dictating the functionality of HTML specifications rather than accommodating the management of these standards is an overreach and outside the scope and intention of any open source platform, including WordPress. If you need clarification or guidance on this issue, I suggest going to the W3C website.

[webdados]

Exactly:
https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html-markup-20110525/a.html
https://www.w3schools.com/tags/att_a_target.asp

[jb510]

@richardkentgates wrote:

This issue has been decided by W3C, which is the governing body of web standards. Dictating the functionality of HTML specifications rather than accommodating the management of these standards is an overreach and outside the scope and intention of any open source platform, including WordPress. If you need clarification or guidance on this issue, I suggest going to the W3C website.

This is a completely different topic but it's irked me for years that WP goes about touting powering nearly 1/3 of the internet yet neither the WP Foundation/Org nor Automattic has ever gotten involved in web standards bodies like W3C at all.

@webdados wrote:

@jb510 while I agree with you that the visitor should be warned, and not the publisher, enforcing this would require loading some JS and/or CSS that would need to be compatible with all the themes out there.
I think this kind of warnings is a browser job, not the website itself. (but I might be wrong, of course)

A default could be implemented without JS that themes could then override if they wanted.

Gutenberg markup can insert the hidden span with "opens in new window" test or an icon. Note that an :after pseudo-element would work as well but I don't think screen readers would properly read the content so that doens't work on it's own.

Finally, I agree, this totally seems like a browser's job. I feel markup should be readable, not vocal, but I'm also trying to find a useful compromise that is helpful rather removing useful and heavily used tools.

[richardkentgates]

@jb510 The entire browser experience and the web, in general, is made to accommodate new tabs. Even debating this issue misses the point entirely of tabbed browsing an encourages bloating ISP networks with unnecessary back button clicks. Not too many users on the web are confined to a single-tab environment nor does the average user make use of the context menu for everyday navigation. The idea of a new tab from a link is to expand on a point/idea/article, not replace it, lest you wait for more page loading via the back button. Even debating this is complete tunnel vision (over focus).

10,000 active page viewers + 2,000 back button clicks. Resource burden much?

[paaljoachim]

Btw here is an issue karmatosed made on Jan 18 - Iterations on link interface:
#4572

[StaggerLeee]

Yesterday I noticed one place where open in new tab would be very desirable. Documentation and Feedback submenus for Gutenberg admin demo menu item. Why navigate away from Gutenberg open edit screen ?