rez wrote:
[color=blue]
> Richard Cornfordrd wrote:[color=green]
> > "rez" <google_news@mail.requestfinder.com> wrote in message
> > news:3F6D8AA0.3BDB1D88@mail.requestfinder.com...[color=darkred]
> > >I find it rather frustrating that Netscape 4.x is "no longer
> > >supported:"
> > >
http://help.netscape.com/products/cl...or/reflib.html[/color]
> >
> > <URL:
> >
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...t/1.3/referenc
> > e/ >[/color]
>
> Richard, thank you very much for this helpful link. I know Javascript
> is a standard, but as for the DOM, for IE/NN 4.x, do you have a
> similar link?[/color]
<url:
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...ce/frames.html /> is a
complete DOM and JavaScript reference manual for Netscape 4.x (JavaScript 1.3 with anotations
regarding when features were added/deprecated/removed).
<url:
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/dom/domref/ /> is a DOM reference for Gecko based browsers.
<url:
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...1.5/reference/ /> is a JavaScript
reference for JavaScript 1.5
<url:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/a...ence_entry.asp /> is a
DOM reference for all versions of IE > 4.
[color=blue]
> The above link _is_ useful, but here is a simple question: does the
> "span" tag support offset* type interface?[/color]
The only way to access a <span> in Netscape 4.x would be to use <span style="position:relative;"
id="aLayer"> at which point it would be accessible via the document.layers collection. According to
the API reference for a Layer object, there are no offset* properties: <url:
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...nce/layer.html />. The
closest you can come in Netscape 4.x is clip.height, clip.width.
For Gecko based browsers: <url:
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/dom/domr...f.html#1023967 />
does indicate that offset* properties are available for all HTML and XML elements.
For IE: <url:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/a...fsetheight.asp
/> documents.offsetHeight, with similar pages available from the DHTML documentation URL provided
above. You may also be interested in <url:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/a.../measuring.asp />, which describes how various
measurements are determined.
[color=blue]
> The above link leads me down this path:
>
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...t.html#1226315
>
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...-are-here.html
>
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...998/htmlguide/.
>
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...de/tags20.html
>
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...5.html#1174145
>
http://devedge.netscape.com/docs/man...tml/index.html
>
http://developer.netscape.com/index-archive.html
>
http://developer.netscape.com/tech/d...l?cp=dev01mtec
>
> Which is a vicious cycle, not answering my simple question.[/color]
What is your simple question? It seemed that you were interested in documentation. You were
provided with some links, I've provided more. Now it's your job to be able to read and understand
it.
I'm not sure how you got from the "2000/javascript/1.3/reference/document.html" link to
"1998/htmlguide". Scrolling down the initial page spells out how images[], layers[] etc are all
members of the document object. Digging deeper into the documentation and document.layers[] reveals
that they only way to control the visibility of or move any HTML element in Netscape 4.x is to wrap
it in a <layer> (or make an element a layer by specifying STYLE="position:relative;").
Usually the complexity of most modern client-side JavaScript completely negates the possibility of
supporting the same functionality in Netscape 4.x, which should behave as if JavaScript were not
enabled most of the time (unless you are discussing simple form validation or image swapping).
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > >Same seems true with IE.
> > >
> > >How am I ever supposed to make my scripts multi-browser,
> > >when they don't bother giving me basic documentation?[/color]
> >
> > If you think that it is hard to find documentation on Netscape 4 just
> > wait until you start looking for documentation on IceBrowser, Eclipse,
> > Safari, etc, etc. (even Opera documentation).[/color]
>
> I'm a _little_ less concerned, because most people on these browsers
> are not in the techno-challenged category of users. Netscape will
> likely be installed (at least) on their desktop. They might better
> understand exactly _why_ I must use JS, and if I _must_, then they
> will be less offended by it. The alternative would perhaps be a Java
> executable download, which I am also planning to provide for people
> w/o other alternatives. But I don't wish to leave their entire OS
> unsupported (JS-wise.)[/color]
I find the largest percentage of JavaScript disablers and cripplers are among the
non-techno-challenged group. They tend to be the ones who understand the cause and effect of
scripting and popup windows, bouncing ads and other annoyances and configure their browser (or add
3rd party tools) to remove such annoyances.
Very few techo-challenged users are even aware the "ads the pop up all over the place" are caused
by a client-side scripting technology they can disable if they choose.
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > >Am I correct in assuming that we don't give a s**t
> > >about older browsers any more?[/color]
> > <snip>
> >
> > How are you defining "we"? JavaScript for the Internet has to be planned
> > to provide all the necessary content and a usable UI in the (not
> > uncommon) event that the user has a JavaScript disabled/incapable
> > browser. If the absence of JavaScript has been properly planned for and
> > JavaScript is written around cautiously detecting required features
> > prior to their use then JavaScript browsers can be exploited up to their
> > capabilities. Some older, non-standard, undocumented and cranky browsers
> > may get the same as users without JavaScript but that should still be
> > usable.
> >
> > Richard.[/color]
>
> "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
> A. Einstein.
>
> I am very conscious of threads like this from Brett Tabke of
> Webmasterworld:
>
http://www.google.com/search?q=successful+site+google
>
> I don't intend to use Javascript "just 'caus it's cool," but in cases
> where as alternatives people are actually happy downloading
> executables (or buying them.)[/color]
But when you begin to devote 95% of your time modifying scripts to work with a browser that
occupies less then 5% of the browser market (depending on who you ask), then it's time to not
abandon support for that browser, but to simply write your scripts to degrade gracefully in that
browser so your users get a less dynamic (but still usable) experience.
--
| Grant Wagner <gwagner@agricoreunited.com>
* Client-side Javascript and Netscape 4 DOM Reference available at:
*
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/...ce/frames.html
* Internet Explorer DOM Reference available at:
*
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/a...ence_entry.asp
* Netscape 6/7 DOM Reference available at:
*
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/dom/domref/
* Tips for upgrading JavaScript for Netscape 7 / Mozilla
*
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-deve...upgrade_2.html 
