Re: XML files
The XSLT is run but you output xml in the null namespace. So the result-document are not interpreted as html at all, but rather as plain XML. To fix this either change xsl:output method=xml to xsl:output method=html/ or xsl:output/ (autodetect will do the trick for you) to output html. Or add an xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; attribute in the top to the root element which will make you output xhtml. Oh, and you should probably do something about that encoding=ascii attribute. I'm not sure there is such an encoding, and IE doesn't seem to like it. (mozilla doesn't use the encoding attribute since we output a tree) / Jonas Sicking Heikki Toivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Since this involves XSLT you should have better success in the XSLT newsgroup. I don't know what is immediately wrong. The mime types at least seem to be correct for the XSLT file. Patrick Gallagher wrote: Are XML documents supposed to load in Moz? I know this page loads in IE, but I'm not sure if it's correct behaviour or not. Patrick http://www.deepwhite.com/a_solid_plan/deepwhite_nr.xml
Re: Automatic favicon.ico requests
I'll repeat my original question, in case anyone forgot or wasn't listening: What, if anything, can those of us opposed to automatic favicon fetching do to get it removed? One thing that you can do is to get some numbers on how you are hurt by the favicon fetching. I have provided some formulas in the bug and in this newsgroup how to calculate how many requests a server should get for non-existing /favicon.ico files: If you are worried that the favicon fetching will make your errorlogs unreadables by filling them with requests for /favicon.ico, then use the formulas to compare how many /favicon.ico request you'll get and compare that to the size of your normal errorlog. If you are worried that the /favicon.ico requests will cost you extra bandwidth then multiply the number of requests with the size of a request and compare that to your normal server-load. If you are worried that your errorfiles will eat up your serverspace then multiply the number of errorlog entries with the size of each entry and then multiply by the cost from your service provider. You get the idea. And get all your site-owning-friends to calculate these numbers on thier servers too, the more and bigger servers we get numbers for, the better. I have requested this before both in this newsgroup and in the bug, but I assume you just missed it in the general flod of spam in the bug, right? Which is understandable. Anyway, if you have trouble with understanding the formulas in the, then feel free to mail me personally or ask in the bug (I personally don't read newsgroups). Regards, Jonas Sicking
Re: New Features Wanted
I'll never get tired of referencing http://www.e.kth.se/~e97_jsi/rfe.mp3 :-) / Jonas Sicking Robert Zaichkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Good evening! For Netscape 6.x and Mozilla 0.9.x, I have come up with the demand for the following features : 1. ActiveX support Why? There are certain web sites that can only be viewed by Internet Explorer 4.0 and higher. And this can be a real big inconvenience for those who really loathe IE such as myself and over 40 million others! That way, we can tear down some of Microsoft's major blockades! 2. HTTP Mail Server Support Why? Outlook Express is the only e-mail client to support this feature! And this is integral if one were to view his/her Hotmail account offline. 3. Improve File Manager Capabilities How? By allowing users to view information on hard drives. By adding a tab that will allow users to view all the folders in the hard drive. By allowing users to move, copy, and delete some of the files. 4. Better Font Support for MailNews and Composer Why? One can pick from only five different fonts in Netscape 6.1 and Mozilla 0.9.6. Netscape 4.78 allows you to choose any of the fonts that are installed on your computer! It sure does elp make the text more appealing, for sure! There's also one thing which I think should be removed (From Netscape 6.x, that is) : Remove that friggin' AOL on Desktop! It's the biggest F***ing nusaince to have on a computer and over 90 percent of the Internet world doesn't give a crap about this! I have personally tested AOL and it messed up my PC big time! Even though Netscape was bought by AOL doesn't mean that AOL can force them to put on unwanted stuff by default such as this! If Netscape and Mozilla could inplement some of these features in their upcoming browsers, then that would really help bring back some more of the former Netscape users who went for the damned Internet Explorer.
Re: Roadmap and Milestone update
This is great news! I've always thought that the branching was too soon (also, this gives us some extra time for transformiix which we hope to release for 0.9 : ) ). However, I'm still missing that "Mozilla 1.0 draft definition" mentioned in the last sentence in the roadmap. Personally I would also recommend a Mozilla 0.9 draft definition so that we get an easy landing for moz1.0. IMVVHO it should be something like "architecturally complete" for 0.9, so that there is no need for major rewrites between 0.9 and 1.0. / Jonas Sicking "Asa Dotzler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... In response to the large number of bugs nominated and targeted by the community against Mozilla 0.9 and our desire to maintain 0.9 as a recommended beta branch point we have added one additional milestone to the schedule. This new Mozilla 0.8.1 Milestone will replace the 0.9 milestone in the calendar. Mozilla 0.9 and all subsequent Milestones have been shifted out one 5 week cycle. This results in a projected a 0.9 release date of April 23. This new Milestone has been added to Browser and MailNews products in Bugzilla and http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html will be updated shortly with the adjusted schedule. --Asa
