Sounds good. We discussed iOS issues earlier. Is there a reliable way to detect if it is an iPhone6 or more importantly the larger Plus?
Werner Am 25.09.2014 06:14 schrieb "Reza Naghibi" <[email protected]>: > Looks good. I will echo your request for user agent data. The lack of data > impacts the projects ability to identify new devices. > > <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: "eberhard speer > jr." <[email protected]> </div><div>Date:09/25/2014 3:26 AM (GMT-05:00) > </div><div>To: "dev >> '[email protected]'" < > [email protected]> </div><div>Subject: Fwd: Re: [whatwg] > Adding a property to navigator for getting device > model </div><div> > </div>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > FYI, my 2 cents to the WhatWG on the UA-string. > > esjr > - -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: Re: [whatwg] Adding a property to navigator for getting device > model > Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 10:21:05 +0300 > From: eberhard speer jr. <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > > Hi, > > As a contributor to the (incubating) Apache DeviceMap project, > UA-strings are pretty 'dear' to me. > > While I would agree there is no immediate need for new or extra > structures; the vendors just applying the existing 'standards' and not > abusing the UA-string for 'marketing' purposes, would go a long way. > > An ideal UA-string would, as Silvia Pfeiffer pointed out, contain : > OS, Browser and Rending Engine, with version numbers. In the case of a > 'device' [a pretty fluid concept] a deviceId [hopefully related to an > UAProfile] should also be present. > > It seems to me that thanks to HTML 5 and all the nifty frameworks > out-there most 'device detecting' these days is mainly for the purpose > of analyses and I think this is the main reason for Marketing Man to > get involved and fiddle with the "truthiness" of the UA-string and > sometimes even values reported by the navigator object itself. > > If there's anything upsetting us UA-stringers it's the cavalier > attitude towards the existing 'standards'. > > My 2c. > > eberhard speer jr. > > PS : Please send me ua-strings... > > On 24/09/2014 19:42, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > On Sep 24, 2014 3:51 AM, "Silvia Pfeiffer" > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> On 24 Sep 2014 20:40, "James Graham" <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> On 24/09/14 02:54, Jonas Sicking wrote: > >>> > >>>> In the meantime, I'd like to add a property to > >>>> window.navigator to enable websites to get the same > >>>> information from there as is already available in the UA > >>>> string. That would at least help with the parsing problem. > >>>> > >>>> And if means that we could more quickly move the device > >>>> model out of the UA string, then it also helps with the > >>>> UA-string keying thing. > >>> > >>> It's not entirely clear this won't just leave us with the > >>> device string in two places, and unable to remove either of > >>> them. Do we have any evidence that the sites using UA > >>> detection will all change their code in relatively short order, > >>> or become unimportant enough that we are able to break them? > >> > >> Why don't we provide a better structure and not just a random > >> string. For example: deviceID, browserID, renderingEngineVersion > >> ... Not sure what > > else > >> would be useful to group actions that the developer needs to > >> take. Haven't looked in detail. > > > > I'm supportive of exposing any information that we are already > > exposing through the UA string. > > > > But most of it already is. Through various other properties on the > > navigator object. > > > > / Jonas > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUI8ONAAoJEOxywXcFLKYcr2AH/idTdR319Oq5cCmKdnG5tSHk > FmmvWXqc9CqDIu037v5Zh11PdHJhT61BV7jyyXBBNVSNMPT4fV6MwzUjFyM0ib6T > ThhmC5x6EFFt0fNg0HWAxWUsxhfT5uyOQ32mV42cJoT+5YVE8pJPc3MpNpo3EdZA > B3Wu07U3MqnuS0fVPc4k0US0Is6kzixJzWaseQVCRpP9stwXJxh9qThMuhYusrsR > GxBO/Wud3ArKkrMVES0++F7KLfBVfo+Pmje+rzDG90aHP5gvnpjEzqO9KKTdT1k+ > 5O15pv85EIFGYKGas9v0bzIOhe1r9A9ydNANQUsbIBpiZ/BjpZ50jP6MAP1j05Y= > =DULx > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >
