I would like the bookmark manager to have the capability to find duplicate bookmards and delete or move them to a duplicate bookmark folder.

Later.

Related: bug 10198, "[RFE]Warn user if adding an existing bookmark." Reopening from resolved/later to future milestone, and adding the helpwanted keyword.

Future, reassigning...

lovely idea, hope this will be finished tomorrow ? *duck*

Yuk. This is why I dislike Tom (my network QA teammate) being stuck w/ RDF... This is either a dupe of bug 10198, or it needs to be re-written as the RDF bug that that bookmarks feature would depend on...

I don't have a problem changing the component to RDF, but I am seeing two related but different bugs. bug 10198 seems to be intended have Mozilla search the existing bookmarks during an add to make sure the bookmark does not already exist. If so, I would expect Mozilla to update the existing bookmark (title etc. may have changed) and notify the user. This bug, was intended to have the bookmark manager provide an option to search for duplicate bookmarks. If bug 10198 were implemnted, and the Mozilla installer were updated to weed out duplicate bookmarks, then this bug would not need to be fixed because there could never be a duplicate bookmark. Please feel free to assign this bug and rewrite it in whichever way you see fit. If you let me know what you think needs to be done, I can spend the time re-writing the bug. Thanks

On the bookmarks management, let me jump in here. I keep very extensive bookmarks. I disagree about preventing duplicate bookmarks. Duplicate bookmarks should not be prevented. I often manage bookmarks into areas of interest and there is sometimes overlap. However, at the present time there is no way to find bookmarks with the search function. You can search, and you get a list in a separate window. You cannot then find those bookmarks where they exist in the manage bookmarks window. So you cannot delet them or drag them into folders. It would be good to be able to search for bookmarks by keyword in the manage bookmarks window, and be able to find again. This would allow finding and managing duplicates and related issues. This cannot be done now. As it is now, the bookmark management is between non-existant and grimly difficult.

Just a note of agreement with previous poster (Steve, comment 7). I know that this comment doesn't wholly belong with this bug, so I'll try to keep my comments on-topic. It would be nice to be able to search for duplicate bookmarks with the option of deleting at will. I don't think auto-updating and replacement of previous bookmarks is desirable, though perhaps a dialog explaining that "A duplicate bookmark was found in x | y | z folder. Would you like to update the bookmark or create a new one?" would offer clear options.

(In reply to comment #7) > On the bookmarks management, let me jump in here. I keep very extensive > bookmarks. > ... I agree with the whole of this comment. I would like also to have the ability to replace a duplicate, with an alias, perhaps with a different title. Each substantive bookmark would need an ID ... If I have a section of my bookmarks devoted to Perl (which I do) and a section on Poetry, I would like links to pages concerning Perl poetry to be in the Perl section with aliases in the Poetry section. Removing duplicates, particularly without confirmation, would be a bad idea. Of course duplicates in the same section, or adjacent duplicates are not needed: In the latter case it would be OK for Firefox to refuse to create them, in the former I think that it would be OK for them to highlighted to be handled manually.

bump this because it would be great to see this in ff2. showing duplicates and what folders they're in if they're in a folder so they can be found... :)

This bug should block bug 10198 as that one uses this feature. https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1553/ detects duplicate bookmarks for Firefox.

1) Now you can't make duplicate bookmark (see Bug 789468) 2) Firefox duplicate bookmarks finder from http://bookmarkdd.mozdev.org/ after modding install.rdf partially working in SeaMonkey, so if somebody still interested in this bug it's worth asking that add-on developer to add complete SeaMonkey support I propose closing this as invalid, any other thoughts?

I'd say this is probably extension fodder but I'm not completely sure.

Resolved per whiteboard