On Dec 19, 2007 11:59 AM, Jim Lucas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Daniel Brown wrote:
> > On Dec 19, 2007 11:18 AM, Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, December 19, 2007 9:31 am, Richard Heyes wrote:
> >>>>> I think that any MTA or client that doesn't work with the
> >>>>> Reply-To header isn't worth beans.
> >>>> very very true
> >>> Well the Reply-To: header isn't for bounces.
> >> The OP was asking about Return-path, not Reply-to
> >>
> >> Furthermore, while the MTA/client/MUA may not be worth beans, that
> >> doesn't mean nobody is using it.
> >>
> >> I don't think any MS products are worth beans; Yet many people are
> >> using them. Should I not bother to check IE compatibility?
> >
> > Actual code from a live page of mine. Just because I could. ;-P
> >
> > <?
> > if(!stristr($_SERVER['HTTP_USER_AGENT'],"mozilla")) {
> > die("We only allow Mozilla browsers in here!\n");
> > }
> > ?>
> >
> > DISCLAIMER: Yes, lawyers, I'm aware that client headers can be forged.
> >
>
> I was just about to say the same thing!
If Micro$oft can require Internet Exploder for some pages, damn
it, I can require Mozilla for others. ;-P
Sincerely,
A Biased Mozilla Developer
--
Daniel P. Brown
[Phone Numbers Go Here!]
[They're Hidden From View!]
If at first you don't succeed, stick to what you know best so that you
can make enough money to pay someone else to do it for you.
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
