On Apr 22, 2007, at 1:18 PM, paulc wrote: > So it appears the issue may lie in how javascript is parsed. I'm not > sure if this is a gecko issue or not, but clearly something is > different enough in javascript in the 1.1 series than 1.0.4. Which > sure says to me that sites that 104 worked great with that depend on > javascript sure may not work correctly with 1.1.
We share the entire JS engine with Firefox, and I can guarantee that if core Javascript functionality were broken on the Gecko 1.8 branch a whole lot of people would have noticed. Given that we already know that Citibank does bad browser sniffing, it's much more likely that they are serving bad JS to you. As has been pointed out on the list before, spoofing works for other people on the Citibank site. No matter how much you want this to be a Camino bug, it's clearly not. -Stuart _______________________________________________ Camino mailing list [email protected] http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/camino
