-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David D. Kilzer wrote:
Joe Auty <jauty@indiana.edu> wrote:
Apparently the developers are working on adding Safari advanced interface support, but in the meantime I was sort of curious as to what the technical hurdles may have been with supporting Safari? Does Safari have some issues with parsing XML documents that Gecko is capable of handling?
XML parsing support has been greatly enhanced (thanks ap!) in WebKit since the last version was released with Safari 2.0.x. The first question (technical hurdles for supporting Safari) would probably be best asked of the AtMail developers who know much more about what Gecko features it uses.
Yeah, perhaps I'll see if I can get them to provide me with a brain dump here so I can see if I can make headway on this myself...
Bug reports about specific failures on http://bugs.webkit.org/ are always welcome! (Reduced test cases will help them get fixed even faster.)
This lack of compatibility is apparent under both Safari 2.x and 3 beta.
If I had to guess, AtMail probably does some user-agent sniffing and disables its advanced features for Safari without even trying them first.
If you'd like to test AtMail against the Gecko version, enable the hidden Debug menu in the Safari 3 Public Beta, then try spoofing as "Firefox 2.0.0.x" on an AtMail site to see how far you get. Again, specific bugs (with reduced test cases if possible) will help a great deal.
http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20030110063041629
There is user agent sniffing going on, but even when forced to serve the XP or XUL interface, there are still various problems. I wish that all there was to it was brain dead user agent sniffing, but this is not the case. - -- Joe Auty UITS Messaging Team jauty@indiana.edu -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGr/nnIGoilq3QRWsRAi67AJ0cqFK9VXkXM1eWKqCrSXRE9GdjKwCgzQfa N6WBUL6dkotNgzDVwzb5s7c= =gp7y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----