# Tutorial:Create you own custom Firefox search plugin in seconds



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

*img379.imageshack.us/img379/9233/pluginub5.png
​ I love Firefox especially the FF search plugin’s. This tutorial will explain how to create your own custom Firefox search plugin in seconds.
 So let’s get started….Open up notepad and paste the following lines..


```
<search
name="Aditech"
sourceTextEncoding="0"
method="GET"
action="*www.google.com/search"
queryCharset="UTF-8"
>
<input name="q"user>
<input name="hl" value="en">
<input name="sitesearch" value="blog.aditech.info">
</search>
</search>
</search>
```

  Replace “Aditech” to any name which you like…and the most important thing replace *“blog.aditech.info”* to any site you wish to have the custom search engine.

Now the save the file as “myplugin.src” [You can use any name but the quotes and .src is mandatory]
*img183.imageshack.us/img183/2097/savefilepw6.png​ 

Copy this file to your FF searchplugins dirctory.. ex: *C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\searchplugins*

 Now we need to have an icon for our custom search engine.You can find a lot’s of free downloadable ico and png files in *www.iconarchive.com/
It is recommended to have a 16×16 pixel image.

For example i downloaded this icon*www.iconarchive.com/icons/fasticon/avatar-boy/boy-6-16x16.png

 After downloading the image rename the image to the plugin name i.e, in my case i must rename it as _myplugin_. Copy this file to the the same searchplugins direcotory.That means you will have 2 files with the same name one src and one png or ico file.


*img444.imageshack.us/img444/4503/saveze6.png​ 

That’s all 
Now close the firefox and again open it and your custom FF search plugin will be ready to use…This method will work for all website which will be indexed by google that means nearly all websites in the world  

Hope you like this easy tutorial….I will next write how to add the FF search plugin install option in your site and to distribute your custom search plugin….So stay tuned….

Referance


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

> This is *G o o g l e*'s cache of *labnol.blogspot.com/2006/09/learn-to-create-firefox-search-plugin.html as retrieved on 14 Apr 2008 16:34:16 GMT.


^^
*64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:Wfat...ox+plugin&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&client=firefox-a


*lifehacker.com/software/firefox/make-your-own-firefox-site-search-plugin-202923.php on Mon Sep 25 2006

You may want to check the source again


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

rohan_shenoy said:


> ^^
> *64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:Wfat...ox+plugin&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&client=firefox-a
> 
> 
> ...


hmm...

i looked through the article and yes mine was similar to it...But i didn't referred that..

I referred the official Mozilla developer website 
link:*mycroft.mozdev.org/deepdocs/quickstart.html

Thanks for pointing it out..

lol... this tut was discovered in 2006... i am 2 years late


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

> I referred the official Mozilla developer website
> link:*mycroft.mozdev.org/deepdocs/quickstart.html


May be you should acknowledge them instead of passing it on as your creation.


----------



## NucleusKore (Apr 18, 2008)

Good tutorial nevertheless, and in future give the REAL source, not your blog.


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

rohan_shenoy said:


> May be you should acknowledge them instead of passing it on as your creation.


It's like SDK doc website ..
Everyone will refer the SDK docs...
Even the source you mentioned has referred it but did he mentioned it...?
Take for example digit articles..They will always refer several site before writing articles but do they give reference to each one of the...

Nevertheless i have mentioned the reference and have removed my blog link



NucleusKore said:


> Good tutorial nevertheless, and in future give the REAL source, not your blog.


I have never done any copy paste related stuffs in my life and will never do in the future as well...SDK docs reference is different from plagiarism...
Nevertheless i will take care of this in the future...


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

I agree that it is a developer documentation. But considering the your tutorial, most of the part is "referred" with your inputs being insignificant. That why I said so.


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

rohan_shenoy said:


> I agree that it is a developer documentation. But considering the your tutorial, most of the part is "referred" with your inputs being insignificant. That why I said so.


Is it.....? 
I never knew that in this tutorial my inputs are insignificant.....and most of the part is "referred" coz it's standard FF code to do so..

AFAIK we can't use any new our own code to do this...?Am i right...?

Thanks again for letting me know that this is an insignificant tut...


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

I don't consider this tut as insignificant, but compared to the juice of the tut, your inputs which make you claim that YOU have written this tutorial are insignificant.

You have just re-written the tutorial and tried to pass it as your own creative work.
One may easily tell by looking st the SDK docs and your code, your tutorial is a just a rip of the documentation?


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

rohan_shenoy said:


> I don't consider this tut as insignificant, but compared to the juice of the tut, your inputs which make you claim that YOU have written this tutorial are insignificant.


did i ever wrote in the article that i created the new code to do this in FF...?
I never claimed that this code is created by me ...

We have to follow the standard coding pattern unless we are capable of creating our own browser engine.....i am not that smart enough to create my own browser engine so i followed the standard FF coding pattern..


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

adi007 said:


> did i ever wrote in the article that i created the new code to do this in FF...?
> I never claimed that this code is created by me ...
> 
> We have to follow the standard coding pattern unless we are capable of creating our own browser engine.....i am not that smart enough to create my own browser engine so i followed the standard FF coding pattern..



You may have never claimed it to be your own, but you neither disclaimed it either and also gave your blog as the SOURCE of it, until I pointed it out? Did you?


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

rohan_shenoy said:


> You may have never claimed it to be your own, but you neither disclaimed it either and also gave your blog as the SOURCE of it, until I pointed it out? Did you?


AFAIK SOURCE is different from SDK REFERENCE 

And moreover how can one learn the coding patter without going through the SDK docs......?Can you publish a VB tut without knowing how to code in VB

It's just like how can one learn C language without reading about C language...?

If one creates a new c tutorial ..is it necessary to specify how did he learned  what is prinf,what is scanf etc,....I didn't knew that this is necessary...


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

^Learning C and writing a program in C is different that what this tutorial has.

In the SDK doc link which you gave, one can clearly see that they have written the ENTIRE code. The SDK doc is a tutorial in itself.


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

rohan_shenoy said:


> ^Learning C and writing a program in C is different that what this tutorial has.
> 
> In the SDK doc link which you gave, one can clearly see that they have written the ENTIRE code. The SDK doc is a tutorial in itself.


is it...?
i can't see that...If yes then why the blog link you specified didn't gave the reference to it...

see here from the source you specified
link: *labnol.blogspot.com/2006/09/learn-to-create-firefox-search-plugin.html


> This tutorial will show you a very simple Firefox hack that allows you to search any blog straight from the Firefox search bar without having to visit the actual blog



Did he said that he referred mozilla SDK docs to find it out...? or do he has strong  sixth sense that he can sense what code to lay in order to do so..


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

^I have no taking with what other sites publish or if they plagiarise.
Anyways, the fact is that you were trying to advertise your own blog/site by putting it as the source. That was real cheap and downmarket way of getting publicity. Please think of better ways from next onwards. Don't get caught so easily.


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

rohan_shenoy said:


> ^I have no taking with what other sites publish or if they plagiarise.
> Anyways, the fact is that you were trying to advertise your own blog/site by putting it as the source. Please think of better ways from next onwards. Don't get caught so easily.


Excuse me sir...
if i want to advertise then i would have given small intro about the tut and would have given read it in my blog...

and the blogger you referred is not an ordinary blogger he is Amit Agarwal...India's pro blogger...

See why i am arguing with you is not to support that my tut is awesome or some thing like that...Actually i am ashamed that this tut was found 2 year ago itself..

Why i am arguing with you coz your views about reference has shocked me...
I am arguing with you coz you have stated my act as plagarisum ..

You could have just posted that this tut was found 2 years ago by Amit and i would have accepted that and removed this tut itself.... but the way you argued with me was not good.....

AND THE ABOVE POST BY YOU IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

^ I have nothing to do with who is doing what.



> but the way you argued with me was not good...


I know I should have not argued so much but frankly since you tried to pass it on as your own work by linking to your blog as the source, It was not possible for me to end the matter simply by pointing it out and infact, seemed as "Advertising" of your blog.

If you would not have linked to your blog unjustly, I would have never argued.


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

rohan_shenoy said:


> ^ I have nothing to do with who is doing what.
> 
> 
> I know I should have not argued so much but frankly since you tried to pass it on as your own work by linking to your blog as the source, It was not possible for me to end the matter simply by pointing it out and infact, seemed as "Advertising" of your blog.
> ...


First off all it's my own work...i never referred the labnol link you gave me....
I just referred the SDK docs in order to do so.....

See no one will give reference of SDK docs for their tut.....

If i was the first to make this tut then i would have never agreed with you...But unfortunately Amit found out this 2 years ago...so i can't argue with you any more...

But i must say one thing....

SDK reference is totally different from plagiarism

i think it would be nice if you could google about these two and then argue with me...


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

^ Whatever you say: Anybody who looks at the SDK docs and the tut can easily identify what the case is. I don't need to stress more to prove my point.

Referring is different from copying. Your code consists of about 10 lines of which all 10 can be exactly found as those in the docs. I don't understand what made you feel that you are justified to give  your blog as the SOURCE.

The best description would be that "You have rewritten the same tutorial".


----------



## FilledVoid (Apr 18, 2008)

If you copy pasted the code from SDK then yes I think it requires a reference . Regardless of the fact that it is from the SDK documentation. That said if it is not as is in the SDK then it is not plagiarism and its called "collusion". And I seriously doubt if anyone checks for collusion in programs . An example would be having to post a reference for every line of code you put in the Programming Section.


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

> Your code consists of about 10 lines of which all 10 can be exactly found as those in the docs.


rofl....rofl....You are making me to laugh.....
Do you know what a SDK mean...Did you tried to google it....?
If anyone deigns a VB app then all the code used will be specified in the SDK itself...
man i need to save this thread before the mods come and delete the posts...it's so funny


----------



## victor_rambo (Apr 18, 2008)

@Adi, what you suppose to be "referred" is actually "lifted" from SDK.

It not a case where you are using a function or a trick from SDK, but rather your whole code is lifted from SDK docs.



> Do you know what a SDK mean


Does that change the reality that you lifted the code and tried to pass it as your own creative work?


----------



## adi007 (Apr 18, 2008)

FilledVoid said:


> If you copy pasted the code from SDK then yes I think it requires a reference . Regardless of the fact that it is from the SDK documentation. That said if it is not as is in the SDK then it is not plagiarism and its called "collusion". And I seriously doubt if anyone checks for collusion in programs . An example would be having to post a reference for every line of code you put in the Programming Section.


That;s what i am trying to convince him... 
I have not copy pasted the code from the SDK...you can see it for your self..


----------

