David E. Ross wrote on 10/07/2015 02:26:
-- How to feature-sniff instead of browser-sniff
How to feature-sniff for IE, Chrome, Safari and Opera ? Where there is
no gecko there :-)
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
On 07/10/2015 03:45 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
David E. Ross wrote on 10/07/2015 02:26:
-- How to feature-sniff instead of browser-sniff
How to feature-sniff for IE, Chrome, Safari and Opera ? Where there is
no gecko there :-)
Is a UA needed if the sites feature sniff?
--
Kubuntu 14.10 | KDE
On 7/10/2015 5:56 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
On 07/10/2015 03:45 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
David E. Ross wrote on 10/07/2015 02:26:
-- How to feature-sniff instead of browser-sniff
How to feature-sniff for IE, Chrome, Safari and Opera ? Where there is
no gecko there :-)
Is a UA needed if the sites
On 7/10/2015 12:45 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
David E. Ross wrote on 10/07/2015 02:26:
-- How to feature-sniff instead of browser-sniff
How to feature-sniff for IE, Chrome, Safari and Opera ? Where there is
no gecko there :-)
Feature sniffing is independent of user agent. Whether Gecko is
David E. Ross wrote:
The link Read More about Gecko on the Gecko is Gecko page at
http://geckoisgecko.org/ is a link to a Wikipedia article about Gecko,
which was updated less than two weeks ago. You can edit that Wikipedia
to eliminate obsolete information. The other links at Gecko is Gecko
On 9/07/2015 4:34 AM, John Duncan wrote:
Daniel wrote:
On 8/07/2015 5:55 AM, John Duncan wrote:
Snip
To fix this,
couldn't we try always reporting the Firefox/x.x bit at the end of the
UA string to deal with invalid sniffing? or is that not the issue in
this circumstance?
Yes, you could,
On 9/07/2015 7:43 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
Ray_Net wrote on 07/07/2015 09:55:
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 23:40:
On 07/06/2015 05:22 PM, Ray_Net wrote:
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 15:53:
On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
Daniel wrote on 09/07/2015 08:30:
On 9/07/2015 7:43 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
Ray_Net wrote on 07/07/2015 09:55:
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 23:40:
On 07/06/2015 05:22 PM, Ray_Net wrote:
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 15:53:
On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is
Daniel wrote on 09/07/2015 08:37:
On 9/07/2015 4:34 AM, John Duncan wrote:
Daniel wrote:
On 8/07/2015 5:55 AM, John Duncan wrote:
Snip
To fix this,
couldn't we try always reporting the Firefox/x.x bit at the end of the
UA string to deal with invalid sniffing? or is that not the issue in
Ray_Net wrote:
Ray. now that you can get to the required site (skynet!! Are you
working on Terminator or something?? ;-P ) , can you tell the Site
Manager, or whomever, to start sniffing for Gecko, rather than for
Firefox, and direct them to ..
http://geckoisgecko.org/
Hmmm, ten different
On 7/9/2015 12:06 PM, NFN Smith wrote [in part]:
Ray_Net wrote:
Ray. now that you can get to the required site (skynet!! Are you
working on Terminator or something?? ;-P ) , can you tell the Site
Manager, or whomever, to start sniffing for Gecko, rather than for
Firefox, and direct them to
On 8/07/2015 6:09 AM, John Duncan wrote:
EE wrote:
Daniel wrote:
and, Jonathan and others, just FYI, it's my belief that if the sniffers
sniffed for the term Gecko rather than the actual name then they would
accept Firefox, SeaMonkey and Opera (and probably others), at a minimum
Opera uses
On 8/07/2015 5:55 AM, John Duncan wrote:
Snip
To fix this,
couldn't we try always reporting the Firefox/x.x bit at the end of the
UA string to deal with invalid sniffing? or is that not the issue in
this
Daniel wrote:
On 8/07/2015 6:09 AM, John Duncan wrote:
EE wrote:
Daniel wrote:
and, Jonathan and others, just FYI, it's my belief that if the sniffers
sniffed for the term Gecko rather than the actual name then they
would
accept Firefox, SeaMonkey and Opera (and probably others), at a minimum
Daniel wrote:
On 8/07/2015 5:55 AM, John Duncan wrote:
Snip
To fix this,
couldn't we try always reporting the Firefox/x.x bit at the end of the
UA string to deal with invalid sniffing? or is that not the issue in
this circumstance?
Yes, you could, John, but then no-one will ever know about
Ray_Net wrote on 07/07/2015 09:55:
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 23:40:
On 07/06/2015 05:22 PM, Ray_Net wrote:
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 15:53:
On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 23:40:
On 07/06/2015 05:22 PM, Ray_Net wrote:
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 15:53:
On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
Daniel wrote:
and, Jonathan and others, just FYI, it's my belief that if the sniffers
sniffed for the term Gecko rather than the actual name then they would
accept Firefox, SeaMonkey and Opera (and probably others), at a minimum
Opera uses Webkit, so why would a sniffer accept it by looking
David E. Ross wrote:
On 7/5/2015 11:26 PM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
This is the result of invalid user-agent sniffing. See my
EE wrote:
Daniel wrote:
and, Jonathan and others, just FYI, it's my belief that if the sniffers
sniffed for the term Gecko rather than the actual name then they would
accept Firefox, SeaMonkey and Opera (and probably others), at a minimum
Opera uses Webkit, so why would a sniffer accept it by
On 7/07/2015 1:49 AM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 09:04:30 -0400, Jonathan N. Little
lws4...@gmail.com wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 08:26:19 +0200, Ray_Net
tbrraymond.schmit...@tbrscarlet.be wrote:
A site,
Daniel wrote on 07/07/2015 12:16:
On 7/07/2015 1:49 AM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 09:04:30 -0400, Jonathan N. Little
lws4...@gmail.com wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 08:26:19 +0200, Ray_Net
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 08:26:19 +0200, Ray_Net
tbrraymond.schmit...@tbrscarlet.be wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
Seamonkey is not a commonly
On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
Which site directs you there?
Getting it fixed to work with SeaMonkey seems like the priority.
Browser Happy
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 15:53:
On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
Which site directs you there?
http://www.skynet.be/fr
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 09:04:30 -0400, Jonathan N. Little
lws4...@gmail.com wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 08:26:19 +0200, Ray_Net
tbrraymond.schmit...@tbrscarlet.be wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me
On 7/5/2015 11:26 PM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
This is the result of invalid user-agent sniffing. See my
http://www.rossde.com/internet/sniffing.shtml.
--
On 07/06/2015 05:22 PM, Ray_Net wrote:
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 15:53:
On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
Which site directs you there?
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
29 matches
Mail list logo
