On Jul 31, 9:30 am, Andrew Sackville-West
<and...@farwestbilliards.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:55:45AM -0500, Anson Gardner wrote:
>
> > > > Change the preference general.useragent.extra.firefox from
> > > > "Iceweasel/2.0.0.5" (or whatever your version is to "Firefox/2.0.0.5".
>
> > > Worked like a treat, thanks!!
>
> > > > Then web sites won't be able to tell the difference, and FWIW you
> > > > should report the web site to it's owners as broken. User-agent
> > > > detection is broken behavior.
>
> > > I feel it's the website not knowing the browser, hense, unable to render
> > > the page properly. Thanks.
>
> > Not to get all gripey or anything, but there are web standards for precisely
> > this reason. Seehttp://www.w3.org
>
> Having just put together my first real webpage (still pretty basic)
> let me tell you (I'm sure you know) its a royal PITA. I've had to make
> an extra stylesheet just for stupid IE and then put a check for IE in
> the headers. Thankfully it was pretty simple and I end up with a page
> that renders "okay" in IE and looks great in everything else. I told
> my "customer" (heh, step-mother) that if it got any more complicated
> that I wasn't going to support IE and we'd just put up a redirect to
> mozilla. She doesn't understand but, what can you do. I'm not going to
> go down that road.

Why not just code to the standard instead of to a browser, do your
testing in an ACID compliant browser like Konqueror (instead of a
browser that can't render to the standard), and then call it good? If
it looks good there, it'll look just as good in any browser that
actually complies with the standard or does a reasonably good job
faking it?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

(quote)
One of the most common operations performed in a Web page is to detect the browser type and version. Browser detection is performed to ensure that the content presented to the browser is compatible and renders correctly....
(end quote)

The quote is 100% bullshit of course. The whole idea of html was to provide the content with markup and allow the USER to customize the look in the browser. Personally I never wasted time doing anything more than selecting font sizes... Then came 'stylesheets' to encourage browsers to display something more like what the content creator wants, and here's one point where things start to break very badly. User agent detection is a Microsoftism; for the most part I get the impression that MS uses this to redirect users who don't use IE* to some crap site to give the impression that the browser is broken (see stories on MS campaign against Opera).

As for complex sites and things that work/don't work - making use of server-side scripts should ensure that everything works as long as it is content supported by the W3C standards and the version of the standard coded into the browser. For those site designers who require the use of proprietary codecs like 'Flash' just to view and browse a website, we have a special name: moron. Standards good, proprietary crap bad. Proprietary crap claiming to be standard: must be Microsoft.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

(quote)
One of the most common operations performed in a Web page is to detect the browser type and version. Browser detection is performed to ensure that the content presented to the browser is compatible and renders correctly....
(end quote)

The quote is 100% bullshit of course. The whole idea of html was to provide the content with markup and allow the USER to customize the look in the browser. Personally I never wasted time doing anything more than selecting font sizes... Then came 'stylesheets' to encourage browsers to display something more like what the content creator wants, and here's one point where things start to break very badly. User agent detection is a Microsoftism; for the most part I get the impression that MS uses this to redirect users who don't use IE* to some crap site to give the impression that the browser is broken (see stories on MS campaign against Opera).

As for complex sites and things that work/don't work - making use of server-side scripts should ensure that everything works as long as it is content supported by the W3C standards and the version of the standard coded into the browser. For those site designers who require the use of proprietary codecs like 'Flash' just to view and browse a website, we have a special name: moron. Standards good, proprietary crap bad. Proprietary crap claiming to be standard: must be Microsoft.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Jul 31, 2007, at 7:28 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Why not just code to the standard instead of to a browser, do your
> testing in an ACID compliant browser like Konqueror (instead of a
> browser that can't render to the standard), and then call it good? If
> it looks good there, it'll look just as good in any browser that
> actually complies with the standard or does a reasonably good job
> faking it?

In this vein, I've found a *lot* of strange incompatibilities between
browsers go away if I use a proper DOCTYPE header and check my HTML
with W3C's validator. It seems without a document type each browser
renders according to its particular best guess, which isn't very
dependable, and lot of what I thought were browser bugs turned out to
be me not following the standard.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org