W3C: Common User Agent Problems...
Hi ! After reading W3C's "Common User Agent Problems" (http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-cuap-20010206) - which of these "issues" are (still) present in your Zilla ? Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /O /==\ O\ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer (;O/ \/ \O;) TEL +49 641 99-41370 FAX +49 641 99-41359
Re: W3C: Common User Agent Problems...
Gervase Markham wrote: > > After reading W3C's "Common User Agent Problems" > > (http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-cuap-20010206) - which of these "issues" > > are (still) present in your Zilla ? > > It would be good if someone would take the initiative, and go through that > document thoroughly and file RFE bugs on stuff we don't do, and which > there isn't a bug on already. Then file a meta-bug which depends on all of > them. I don't have the time to do this, sorry. Volunteers _wanted_ (what about a MozillaZine article ?) !! Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /O /==\ O\ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer (;O/ \/ \O;) TEL +49 641 99-41370 FAX +49 641 99-41359
BugZilla access control (bug 54095 == "Permission denied") !?
Hi ! Stupid question: Does BugZilla have some kind of access control ? An attempt to read bug 54095 (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54095) ends-up in: -- snip -- Permission denied. Sorry; you do not have the permissions necessary to see bug 54095. -- snip -- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /O /==\ O\ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer (;O/ \/ \O;) TEL +49 641 99-41370 FAX +49 641 99-41359
Re: BugZilla access control (bug 54095 == "Permission denied") !?
Asa Dotzler wrote: > > Stupid question: > > Does BugZilla have some kind of access control ? [snip] > > that bug has been re-filed as > http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57820 Guess how I discovered this bug... :-)) Question was if BugZilla allows per-user access control for bugs... Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /O /==\ O\ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer (;O/ \/ \O;) TEL +49 641 99-41370 FAX +49 641 99-41359
Re: W3C: Common User Agent Problems...
Gervase Markham wrote: > > I took the liberty to convert the HTML-file into plaintext, so we can > > comment on this in the newsgroup. > > This would be _so_ much easier to keep track of if each recommendation was > a separate bug... Noone prevents you from creating a "tracker" bug... [snip] > > Mozilla does this "Accept */*"-thingy. I think it's for > > backward-compatibility. > > There needs to be a discussion on what would break if we removed this. I > think it's accepted that we shouldn't do it, but we may have to. It's silly - but this will result in a political debate (think about plugin vendors who may like to get their application/x-foo-bar mimetype pop-up in the "accept" header) - which mimetypes in - which out... the whole "accept"-header is insane (sorry...)... but a better solution - negotiation between server and client would at least require another request/response roundtrip. But this isn't bad as many people think. Due lack this capability in HTTP now site authors use javascript to implement this (which is insane, too... ;-(( ) Ahh... ;-( Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /O /==\ O\ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer (;O/ \/ \O;) TEL +49 641 99-41370 FAX +49 641 99-41359
