I would not object to the changes. I personnally like the Idea of Mozilla 5.9.7 or something like that. That way 1.0 will actually be 6.0.0 (confused yet:).
Jonas J�rgensen wrote: > Jeremy M. Dolan wrote: > >> >> First we have the Mozilla/ token, which is now decreed to be 5.0 >> indefinitely. It's for compatibility, and indicates nothing. > > > > It's not needed for compatibility. Very few sites block everything that > doesn't have a Mozilla/, and most of the ones that do (at least of the > ones I've been able to find) block everything that isn't Mozilla/4 > (and/or MSIE), so Mozilla/5.0 get's blocked anyway. > > Try setting your UA string to Seamonkey/1.0 and surf. The number of > sites that would block you (and doesn't block Mozilla already) is very, > very low. > > We *can* use Seamonkey/1.0 (or whatever). We don't need the Mozilla/5.0. > I'll be happy to send tech evang mails to site that would block us if we > dropped Mozilla/5.0. > > Am I really the only person here who believes in using User-Agent > correctly? Someone, anybody, if I'm not alone, please speak up! > > There are more sites that breaks in Moz because it doesn't support > document.all than sites that would break if we dropped Mozilla/5.0. Both > are against the spec, but still we evang sites with document.all but try > to be compatible with sites with bad UA sniffing. > > >> OK. I'm *really* frickin' tired of typing. Please just agree so I >> don't have to post again. :) > > > I agree with Gecko/ Token Idea 2. >
