Thanks all for the feedback over the weekend. I have most of it 
incorporated into a new version of the document, and I am checking with 
the authors/suppliers of the sniffing code about those comments.

Among other things, I have removed my xemacs-generated mailto from the 
bottom, as Gervase suggested :^|, This document is really a smorgasborg 
of different notes we have lying around, especially Eric's standards stuff.

I will post the updated version of this document in 
mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/, but please continue to offer 
suggestions and updates here if you see anything.

-ian

Zach Lipton wrote:

> Once we have a final version of this page, email [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> Eric at (I am not sure) and me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blake is the owner of
> the evangelism component and I am the qa contact. I was working on getting
> an evangelism site up and running and this will really help.
> 
> Zach
> 
> in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gervase Markham at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/17/00 4:50 PM:
> 
> 
>>> Not only that, the code doesn't take into account the possibility that
>>> there might be other standards-compliant browser with ECMAScript and DOM
>>> support in addition to those that identify themselves as "Netscape".
>> 
>> Why not use the Netscape Ultimate Browser Sniffer? Testing for browsers
>> using if (document.all) and if (document.layers) is Considered Harmful.
>> 
>> Gerv


Reply via email to