- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 17:59:45 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15380 --- Comment #10 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2012-01-03 17:59:43 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > I was suggesting, half seriously, that all browsers have the same User-Agent > string. It seems the logical the way to put an end to server-side sniffing (and > browser stats, oops). Opera would be closer to that goal, if it aligned more with the rest by placing "Mozilla/5.0" as the first token. > AFAIU, it's locked at 9.80 because of crummy script that took the first digit > as the version number and assumed things based on that. The actual version is > at the end of the string, e.g. Version/12.00. I guess when Opera reaches > somewhere between 40 and 80 it could be changed back, but by then it's safe to > assume that scripts will depend on Version/ instead :/ Webkit too uses Version/*. So may be that is fair enough - perhaps they had a similar problem. I don't know about that crummy script and how important that issue was or is. But perhaps it is more serious to be served XML? At any rate: Even Opera/9.80 is not without problems, see the PS below. > (Note that I'm not representing Opera here, I won't have anything to do with > testing or implementing any changes to the UA string, I'm just speaking as > someone with an interest in the topic.) OK. (In reply to comment #8) > Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6.8; U; de) Presto/2.9.168 Opera/11 > Version/11.52 (compatible: msie 10.00) > > This too works with that ASP page. > Note that this option starts with the more general info > and ends with the most specific info. This perhaps makes more sense, w.r.t. the order of specificity, and adds another twist on the compat comment: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6.8; U; de) Presto/2.9.168 Opera/1152 (Moz-compat: Firefox/9.0) Version/11.52 PS: Having "Opera/11.52" (or "Opera/9.80") anywhere, does not work, weird enough, for that ASP solution. Only "Opera/11" or "Opera/1152" works. Thus it would probably, w.r.t. that ASP solution, be impossible for a competitor to include a string such as "(Opera-compatible: Opera/11.52)" - one would have to say "(Opera-compatible: Opera/1152)". (That appears to, somehow, be directed at Opera, specifically, even if it makes no real sense since, as told, e.g. Opera/11 does work.) -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2012 17:59:46 UTC