Поиск в Поддержке

Избегайте мошенников, выдающих себя за службу поддержки. Мы никогда не попросим вас позвонить, отправить текстовое сообщение или поделиться личной информацией. Сообщайте о подозрительной активности, используя функцию «Пожаловаться».

Learn More

New PDF reader always uses the same name "document.pdf" when saving via keyboard shortcut (cmd+S on macOS)

  • Нет ответов
  • 1 имеет эту проблему
  • 12 просмотров
more options

With the previous version of Firefox (with the old PDF reader) I used to open PDF article from physics journals (e.g. https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.131101 ) and save them using cmd+C (on a Mac). The default name of the file used to be "PhysRevLett.125.131101.pdf" while now it's always "document.pdf", which is very inconvenient, since I have to manually rename the files before downloading. If I save the file by clicking on the download icon in the reader, I still get the same more informative filename (but I don't get to choose the location for the download). I'm wondering why the name of the file is not consistent between the two ways of saving documents. Is there a way to go back to the old behaviour (unlikely, I guess)? Anyway I'd like to suggest the developers to go back the old way of handling the file name, if there are no strong reasons for the change.

With the previous version of Firefox (with the old PDF reader) I used to open PDF article from physics journals (e.g. https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.131101 ) and save them using cmd+C (on a Mac). The default name of the file used to be "PhysRevLett.125.131101.pdf" while now it's always "document.pdf", which is very inconvenient, since I have to manually rename the files before downloading. If I save the file by clicking on the download icon in the reader, I still get the same more informative filename (but I don't get to choose the location for the download). I'm wondering why the name of the file is not consistent between the two ways of saving documents. Is there a way to go back to the old behaviour (unlikely, I guess)? Anyway I'd like to suggest the developers to go back the old way of handling the file name, if there are no strong reasons for the change.