On Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:39:15 +0000, S�ren Kuklau wrote: > "Geoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> But ... proprietory or not, standard or not, IE supports them > > No, does not. > >> (or at least it can render the pages I mentioned) > > Yes: These pages have a javascript routine to "detect" the browser. They > usually check for availability of the object "document.all" - only IE > (to my knowledge) has this, so they "think" it is IE then. And then they > assume "if it's not IE, it must be Netscape!", so they do the other code > with document.layers stuff, which only Netscape 4 understands. > Thanks, I can understand that.
>> .. so is there any reason why Moz cannot or should not do so if the > necessary code is included? Would it break Moz to do that? Is the > coding exercise so >> difficult? > > No, but the strict aim of standards compliance as far as possible (there > are very few things not being standards compliant in Mozilla, such as > some CSS attributes) was done to convince people to standards and away > from proprietary extensions of browsers. The less Mozilla is standards > compliant, the less it can convince people. This is the heart of the matter. I think that most of use here would accept that we are engaged in a conflict with M$. Where we differ is as to tactics in this part of the battlefield. From the perspective of a linux user I feel that I have enough difficulties weaning people away from Windows without needing to explain to them the importance of this battle at the same time. I am quite happy, as it were, to dress up as the enemy (if that is what being non-standard involves), if that is what is needed at this time to give me the enormously powerful weapon of a browser that can, from a user's perspective, do anything IE can do. I can appreciate that your point of view may be different. >> I am sorry if I am talking nonsense here, it is just that, if I am, I > would like to understand why. > > You aren't talking nonsense. I'm glad to help you understand this > problem. Thanks again, Geoff
