On 26 April 2018 at 14:25, Ali Juma <aj...@chromium.org> wrote: > It's worth noting that https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=182629 added > back the OS version to the UA string, at least on trunk (the reasons given > there, in https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=182629#c6, sound exactly > like those mentioned by Colin in this thread).
Thanks for the catch. I had missed this commit. This is helpful. On 26 April 2018 at 15:40, Michael Catanzaro <mcatanz...@igalia.com> wrote: > I would say it's the most serious web compatibility problem that exists > today. Our users complain and blame us when important websites are broken in > WebKit because of it. I have personally wasted days  of  development >  effort  playing with WebKit's user agent quirks to get important > websites to work properly. Yea, I get that. The current state of the UA is terrible. It's really an archeological map of browser evolution. It's like going on a first-date and the first thing you talk about is your family tree, and how great-grandpa-andreesen who is all but estranged from the family. It is a tad embarrassing :) On 26 April 2018 at 15:40, Michael Catanzaro <mcatanz...@igalia.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 12:48 PM, Colin Bendell <co...@bendell.ca> wrote: >> Again I ask, is there room for compromise where we can expose the >> version details in the UA (or some alternative) so that we ensure a >> consistent and optimized user experience? > > I don't know. I wish there was, but I don't think so. If you have any > suggestions, that'd be great, but I think it's going to be extremely > difficult or impossible to solve this problem in a way that makes everyone > happy. I was only partially joking about the need for a UA2 spec. Perhaps it is time to bring this to one of the w3c working groups. I'll take it off this thread though :) /colin _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev