JavaScript in Mozilla and Netscape6 is not working
Ivica Mikic
Is anybody doing anything to make JavaScript work in Mozilla and
Netscape6? It is ridiculous that the example of Swimming Fish mentioned
on the Netscape Web site at
http://developer.netscape.com/docs/manuals/communicator/dynhtml/fish1css.htm
doesn't work neither in Mozilla 0.9.2 nor Netscape 6.01!!!
However, the same example works just fine both in Netscape 4.77 and MSIE
5.5??? How is that possible?
Thank you for your attention!
P.S. Also, when you guys will make notification of the new e-mail sounds
off and shows up down on the e-mail client icon? Is it that difficult to
make it work just like in Netscape 4.x?
paul
Ivica,
First, if you want to complain, do it to netscape, not mozilla
developers. Most of here are volunteers!
Second, are you sure it's not DHTML combined with Javascript? Mozilla
uses a new DOM for Javascript,
which means if that site wants it to work with Mozilla or Netscape 6,
they need to re-write their code!!!!
Also, they probably have already hacked up their code inorder to get the
site to work under NS 4 and
MSIE 5, since they both support different DOMs as well.
Before you bitch, know what the hell you are talking about!!!!!!!!!!!
-paul
P.S. - what the hell are you tring to ask? Oh, and if you didn't know
already, mozilla is not NS4, and thank god it never will be!
Henri Sivonen
> Ivica Mikic wrote:
> > Is anybody doing anything to make JavaScript work in Mozilla and
> > Netscape6?
The programming language works. However, the available objects are
different from those available in Nav 4.x. Mozilla supports DOM Level 1.
> > However, the same example works just fine both in Netscape 4.77 and
> > MSIE
> > 5.5??? How is that possible?
Explained here: http://sites.netscape.net/ekrockhome/standards.html
> Second, are you sure it's not DHTML combined with Javascript?
DHTML is not a standard or even a specific non-standard thing. It is a
fuzzy marketing term that refers to some unspecified combination of HTML
and JavaScript.
--
Henri Sivonen
hen...@clinet.fi
http://www.clinet.fi/~henris/
Bernd Khalil
>
> http://developer.netscape.com/docs/manuals/communicator/dynhtml/fish1css.htm
>
>
> doesn't work neither in Mozilla 0.9.2 nor Netscape 6.01!!!
>
> However, the same example works just fine both in Netscape 4.77 and MSIE
> 5.5??? How is that possible?
Uses documents.layers (look at the page source). That's not part of the
official DOM-Specs by the W3C. Nobody should use it.
Vice versa: NS4 and IE do it *wrong*.
Carlfish
somehow managed to type:
>Uses documents.layers (look at the page source). That's not part of the
>official DOM-Specs by the W3C. Nobody should use it.
>Vice versa: NS4 and IE do it *wrong*.
Saying someone is "wrong" for using a different standard isn't really
justified.
W3C DOM was written by a standards body. The standard is several years
old, and has been largely ignored by everyone but the Mozilla project,
whose browser is still in beta.
IE DOM is a de facto standard that has been in full release-quality
software for a long time, and that software has a 90% of the users out
there.
I personally think the W3C should be taken to task for not
amending a standard that breaks so markedly from what is obviously
standard practice amongst web designers.
[rant on]
I mean, what's with the W3C? CSS2 was released in 1998 as a standard, and
I can count on the toes of one hand how many compliant browsers have been
released, three years later. So what are the W3C doing about it? Yes,
they're off working on CSS3. Their own HTML showcase, Amaya, doesn't
even support CSS1 properly.
Wahey!
The closest we have to an implementation of this three year old standard
is Mozilla. So it's not really "W3C CSS2", it's Mozilla CSS2, because
nobody else has bothered with more than a third of it. It may be W3C DOM,
but it's an incompatible subset of what people are really _using_ out
there.
IMHO, anyone who produces a standard should also be responsible for
providing a fully compliant reference implementation, either on their own,
or by partnering with someone who can. But that's just me in my little
utopia.
[rant off]
Charles Miller
Garth Wallace
news:slrn9kr158....@satori.pastiche.org...
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:38:21 +0200, Bernd Khalil <be...@wolfpack.exit.de>
> somehow managed to type:
>
> providing a fully compliant reference implementation, either on their own,
> or by partnering with someone who can.
What do you think Ian Hickson is doing here then?
He's part of the W3C, and the editor for recent CSS
technical reports.
So, even if it isn't official, they have "partnered with
somebody who can", the Mozilla organization.
Remember that Microsoft is a W3C member company,
so the decision to not add document.layers or
document.all to the DOM specs is partly theirs, as
well as Netscape's and a whole lot of other people's.
Richter
You have a good understanding of the basics, but not how they tie in.
The Word Wide Web Consorteum (W3C) consists of interested parties for
the purpose of creating standards reached by consensus of all parties
involved. The Recommendations released by W3C are not simply created
by W3C in a secretive or brought-down-from-the-mountain-tablet way.
Many interested parties which include Microsoft, Netscape, etc. are
involved in the discussion processes from Draft versions to the final
Draft, which the Director of the W3C endorses and releases as a W3C
Recommendation. Every paragraph/phrase/clause has been meticulousely
screened by all the parties until a "consensus" on the final Draft
is reached and only then is it endorsed as a Recommendation.
Microsoft certainly has a big, big voice among the interested parties
and Microsoft certainly agreed to any released Recommendation. It is
a sad fact that Microsoft chooses to implement "selectively" and in a
"self-serving interprative way". IE 5.5 could have been 100% compliant
but it was not. IE 6 final should be 100% compliant but it will not be
and is not. NS 6/Moz and Moz derivatives are going the 100% compliant
route and are there, notwithstanding glitches/bugs. Moz is not alone
is this quest; Opera is also on the same track.
Although IE 5.5 had embraced more compliance, and IE 6 has embraced
even more, Microsoft has chosen to not go the 100% route. Instead, MS
persists on imposing their own brand on the web with Frontpage Editor
and Internet Explorer.
The overwhelming dominance of IE, Frontpage and their like has
practically handed the web over to MS. Your suggestion that W3C should
amend the Recommendations to the non-standard "MS Standard" would hand
over the web to MS completely. So what would be the point of having
standards anyway? W3C might as well be disolved and let MS take over
completely. Do you really wish to have this happen?
Regarding Amaya; I have it and what I have checked, admittedly not
thoroughly, seems to be 100% CSS1 compliant.
Regarding the DOM, what we have is:
DOM0 NS
DOM0 IE
DOM1 W3C
DOM2 HTML
DOM2 XML
Visit this site for a dose of standards: http://www.webstandards.org/
Gus
Michael Gratton
Carlfish wrote:
>
> W3C DOM was written by a standards body. The standard is several years
> old, and has been largely ignored by everyone but the Mozilla project,
> whose browser is still in beta.
DOM Level 1 was based on the DOM of the prevalent browsers at the time -
Navigator and IE. Also, Microsoft helped create the stanard. Then after
all that, they choose to implement only a part of it. It's bizzare.
> IE DOM is a de facto standard that has been in full release-quality
> software for a long time, and that software has a 90% of the users out
> there.
>
[insert stanard remark about 10% of the people on the 'Net is still a
*huge* number of people, and that *everyone* would be better off if the
all browsers implemented the standard here]
<rant>
But hey, how hard would it be for Microsoft to implement even DOM Level
1 properly? I mean, they don't even have the Node.*_NODE consts! It
would take them literally 60 seconds to add them in and would be
guaranteed to not break a single thing. *I've* written a complete Java
DOM implementation in a day or two![0]
The only reason Microsoft don't implement the standards fully is
political. They're being petulant; they don't want to play nicely
because they can use their market advantage to lock people in to using
their software.
I personally think Microsoft should be taken to task for not getting off
their slack, self-centered arses and produce a browser that supports
basic stanards, and hearby challenge them to do it in less time than I took!
</rant>
Mike.
[0] - it sucked; it was slow and bloaty because I needed it written
fast, but it was complete.
--
? Mike Gratton - mi...@vee.net
! Leader in leachate production and transmission since 1976.
> http://web.vee.net/
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.
correct the MS Mess.
<Grin>.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:540-632-5045, FAX:540-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112-1809|pjo...@kimbanet.com, ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!
mailto:pjo...@kimbanet.com
Greg Miller
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:38:21 +0200, Bernd Khalil <be...@wolfpack.exit.de>
> somehow managed to type:
>
>
>>Uses documents.layers (look at the page source). That's not part of the
>>official DOM-Specs by the W3C. Nobody should use it.
>>Vice versa: NS4 and IE do it *wrong*.
>>
>
> Saying someone is "wrong" for using a different standard isn't really
> justified.
In this case, they've used no standard at all, since each browser of the
4.x generation had its own unique APIs.
> W3C DOM was written by a standards body. The standard is several years
> old, and has been largely ignored by everyone but the Mozilla project,
> whose browser is still in beta.
Actually, nearly all MSIE users have a version that supports the W3C DOM
equivalents of the IE DOM functionality.
> I personally think the W3C should be taken to task for not
> amending a standard that breaks so markedly from what is obviously
> standard practice amongst web designers.
The W3C used IE DOM as the basis of its specification. They changed the
parts that had significant technical deficiencies.
--
http://www.classic-games.com/ http://www.indie-games.com/
Taxation Is Theft