I like this too
does the list of space separated numbers comply to that CSS future spec we
were talking about?
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm, that's an interresting format.
>
>
> Glauco P. Gomes wrote:
>
> > @agent ie (versions: 4 5. 6)
> >
> > where 4 = 4
> > and 5. = 5, 5.5, 5.6, 5.6.2 ...
> > and 5.5 = 5.5
> > and 5.5. = 5.5, 5.5.3 ...
> >
> > Glauco P. Gomes
> >
> > Scott O'Bryan escreveu:
> >
> > > @agent id (version: 8-SNAPSHOT).. :)
> > >
> > > Andrew Robinson wrote:
> > >
> > > > Could we leverage maven version parsing algorithms? Maven seems to
> > > > be
> > > > able to parse a lot of crap :)
> > > >
> > > > -Andrew
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Matt Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I agree, full agent "version" matching is troublesome. With this
> > > > > approach:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > @agent ie and (min-major-version: 6) and (min-minor-version: 1)
> > > > > and
> > > > > (max-major-version: 6) {
> > > > > /* styles for IE agent version 6.1 through 6.x (inclusive) */
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > We could go up to as many decimal tokens as we wish, e.g.
> > > > > *-major-version, *-minor-version, *-maintenance-version,
> > > > > *-build-version for "major.minor.maintenance.build" tokens.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----
> > > > >
> > > > > The question I would have then is what should we do with
> > > > > non-numeric
> > > > > values like you pointed out; do we really care about skinning for
> > > > > alphabetical versions?
> > > > >
> > > > > My proposal would be to take the raw version String and split it
> > > > > into
> > > > > up into tokens based on the dot character. We should decide how
> > > > > many
> > > > > tokens we want to support and then we should ignore any further
> > > > > tokens
> > > > > in the String.
> > > > > For each token, we turn it into an integer. If the token
> > > > > contains
> > > > > something other than decimal characters, keep only up to the
> > > > > first
> > > > > non-decimal character. Here are some examples:
> > > > > a.) "0b5" would become "0"
> > > > > b.) "b5" would become "" which we'd treat as "0"
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Matt
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Andrew Robinson
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > Perhaps matching the full agent string is a bad idea. I'd hate
> > > > > to have
> > > > > > to parse many variations of things like:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9b5)
> > > > > > Gecko/2008032620 Firefox/3.0b5
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Andrew Robinson
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > The problem already brought up is that minor version may not
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > enough. In a 3 part version (ie 2.0.10) the minor of 0
> > > > > isn't helpful
> > > > > > > if you want to do something based on the 10 value
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Matt Cooper <
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The regex would be powerful though I'm afraid that it
> > > > > would not as
> > > > > > > > obvious or easy to use for non-technical
> > > > > designers/skinners.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think something like this would be clearer:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @agent ie and (min-major-version: 6) and
> > > > > (min-minor-version: 1) and
> > > > > > > > (max-major-version: 6) {
> > > > > > > > /* styles for IE agent version 6.1 through 6.x
> > > > > (inclusive) */
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > Matt
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Andrew Robinson
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Well that is difficult isn't it? Perhaps what I
> > > > > suggested a long time
> > > > > > > > > back in my bug is best and allow regexp:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > @agent blah and (matches-version: /someRegExp/)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > example to match 6.x through 7.x:
> > > > > > > > > @agent ie and (matches-version: /[67](\.\d)*/)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > yeah it is harder to write, but then we can write it
> > > > > once and it
> > > > > > > > > handles pretty much all use cases.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The other twist is to give the code entire user agent
> > > > > string:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > @agent matches(/MSIE\s+[67]/)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This really gives the user all the control they need
> > > > > and it is pretty
> > > > > > > > > easy to parse without having to code many syntax
> > > > > improvements over
> > > > > > > > > time as new requirements come up.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Andy Schwartz
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:21 PM, Andrew Robinson
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I'll be happy either way, but I think I now bend
> > > > > to the below
> > > > > > > > > > > explanation of 5 == 5.0 from Jeanne's reasoning
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > FWIW, I actually agree with Jeanne's first
> > > > > opinion. :-)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > That is, I think of "5" as "5.*". "5.0" as
> > > > > "5.0.*", etc.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regarding the use of floating points to represent
> > > > > versions... I was
> > > > > > > > > > wondering whether we should avoid this since it
> > > > > would prevents us from
> > > > > > > > > > supporting "major.minor.reallyminor" version
> > > > > strings. I don't know
> > > > > > > > > > that we will ever need to go further than
> > > > > major.minor, though the
> > > > > > > > > > Gecko versions use the third digit, so perhaps we
> > > > > should pick a
> > > > > > > > > > solution that doesn't preclude us from supporting
> > > > > this?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (BTW, sorry all about my little digression earlier
> > > > > on the thread...)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Andy
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Cristi Toth
-------------
Codebeat
www.codebeat.ro
