W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > March to April 1995

Re: distinguishing browser types

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 08:16:17 +0500
Message-Id: <9504241216.AA11838@www18.w3.org>
To: nazgul@utopia.com
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www10.w3.org>
Kee Hinckley writes:
 > We ended up having conditionals
 > based on whether the browser supports Tables, whether it supports Tables
 > within Tables (that crashes/hangs the Cern and NCSA browsers), whether it
 > supports Forms within Tables and whether it supports Images within Tables.
 > 
 > Content negotiation is certainly necessary, but it isn't sufficient.

Content negociation could be sufficient, if folks banded together
and supported it consistently.

If you want to stay "bug for bug compatible" from now until eternity,
that's your perogative.

But I suggest that the long-term solution is to follow the specs
(and get them revised when they're not complete) and urge browser
implementors to fix their stuff. There are enough commercially
supported browsers now that nobody has to rely on unsupported
software for anything critical.

Have you reported the defect to CERN and NCSA (by the way... what's
the "CERN browser"? Do you mean the linemode browser or Arena?)

Dan

 > Which leads me to another question. Are there any browsers out there that
 > actually set the Accept fields based on the helper applications?  I know
 > Netscape doesn't. It makes it rather difficult to determine what formats
 > can be sent to a browser.

Amen. Some folks are working on an internet draft to clarify format
negociation in practice.  I think. (Anybody who's working on it want
to chime in? Anybody else want to volunteer?)

Dan
Received on Monday, 24 April 1995 11:51:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 20 January 2020 16:08:16 UTC