Which IE browser version?

[Wade G. Pemberton]

Does anyone have a quick script to find which version of IE a page is
being viewed with?

Specifically, I want to seperate version 4 from versions 5+, and post a
warning against using 4.

I expect I'll have to search out the (navigator.appA gent) string for
the MSIE substring, but since I don't need it until tomorrow, laziness
dictates I ask here before getting on with it. Is there another
variable? a less cumbersome way?

Thanks in advance.

Wade

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Wade G. Pemberton wrote:

Specifically, I want to seperate version 4 from versions 5+, and post a
warning against using 4.

Before anyone else suggests it: Using the User-Agent header is not
reliable <http://pointedears.de/scripts/test/whatami>. If know that
Norton Internet Security modifies, even removes the User-Agent header.

IE versions below 5.0 do not support the W3C DOM, so this may be one
indicator. Along with testing for document.all, this should suffice.
AFAIK Opera implements document.all but it also implements the W3C-DOM.
I do not know about IE for the Mac, it is likely to be different there.

Yet the warning should be issued for all IEs below 6.0 SP-1 where many
security bugs have been fixed.
HTH

PointedEars

[kaeli]

In article <41************ ***@sprynet.com >, w_*********@spr ynet.com
enlightened us with...

Does anyone have a quick script to find which version of IE a page is
being viewed with?

Specifically, I want to seperate version 4 from versions 5+, and post a
warning against using 4.

Browser detection is usually a big no-no for various reasons, but if you just
want to distinguish between IE versions, use IE-specific code (ignored by
other browsers).

IE conditional comments:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/a...omment_ovw.asp

I don't think too many people use IE4 these days, though.

--
--
~kaeli~
All I ask is the chance to prove that money cannot make me
happy.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace

[Grant Wagner]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

Wade G. Pemberton wrote:

Specifically, I want to seperate version 4 from versions 5+, and post a
warning against using 4.

Before anyone else suggests it: Using the User-Agent header is not
reliable <http://pointedears.de/scripts/test/whatami>. If know that
Norton Internet Security modifies, even removes the User-Agent header.

IE versions below 5.0 do not support the W3C DOM, so this may be one
indicator. Along with testing for document.all, this should suffice.
AFAIK Opera implements document.all but it also implements the W3C-DOM.
I do not know about IE for the Mac, it is likely to be different there.

Yet the warning should be issued for all IEs below 6.0 SP-1 where many
security bugs have been fixed.

In addition to what Thomas has said, you may want to consider Conditional
Comments:

<url:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/a...omment_ovw.asp />

Yes, it's Internet Explorer only, but after all, you're trying to determine
IE versions, so it's not a problem that it's a proprietary way of doing that.
The Conditional Comments and Downlevel-hidden Conditional Comments degrade
quite nicely. I'm not sure about support for Conditional Comments on the MAC,
then again, you probably don't want it telling people to upgrade to version 6
on the MAC since there is no such animal.

You're probably looking for something like:

<!--[if lt IE 6]>
<P>Please upgrade to Internet Explorer 6.</P>
<![endif]-->
<![if !lt IE 6]>
<!-- content intended for IE 6 and other browsers -->
<![endif]>

You can probably identify IE 6SP1 more accurately using more specific version
numbers (<!--[if lt IE 6.0.2800]>). Read "Version Vectors" on the URL I
provided for more information (and some warnings) about targeting too
specific a version.

--
Grant Wagner <gw*****@agrico reunited.com>
comp.lang.javas cript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq

[Randy Webb]

Wade G. Pemberton wrote:

Does anyone have a quick script to find which version of IE a page is
being viewed with?
Yes, I have on.
Specifically, I want to seperate version 4 from versions 5+, and post a
warning against using 4.
Then do it.

"If you are using Internet Explorer 4, I (the uninformed web author)
think its un-advisable for you to use it, even though I have absolutely
no idea why you use it. Yes, it could be because your computer won't run
anything better, and if thats the case then I don't want your business
so I am telling you to use a newer browser"
I expect I'll have to search out the (navigator.appA gent) string for
the MSIE substring, but since I don't need it until tomorrow, laziness
dictates I ask here before getting on with it. Is there another
variable? a less cumbersome way?
navigator.appAg ent?? Did they sneak that one in? I think you are
referring to the userAgent string (laziness prevents me looking it up).
As for your solution, since your homework was already due today, my
laziness (once again) prevents me from copy/pasting the code you need.

Hint: Read Grant and Kaeli's replies.
Thanks in advance.

You are welcome.

--
Randy
comp.lang.javas cript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq

[Wade G. Pemberton]

Thomas :

Before anyone else suggests it: Using the User-Agent header is not
reliable <http://pointedears.de/scripts/test/whatami>. If know that
Norton Internet Security modifies, even removes the User-Agent header.

Yet the warning should be issued for all IEs below 6.0 SP-1 where many
security bugs have been fixed.

I'm not doing anything so dramatic as warning people about security issues.

I'm using some inline styles to display photos, titles, atl tags,
descriptions etc in one viewing area, and want to warn folks with really old
browsers that the page will blow up if they push the buttons. Netscape 4.x
is easy to detect, and give a warning. I'm not sure there are too many IE
4.0's out there, but they're worse in terms of supporting dynamics, so I
decided to add a warning for them. It's just an afterthought, and I was
curious to see if anyone had rendered a quick script that split IE4.0 from
IE 5.0 and ff. ( MS insists they're all 4.0 in response to the simplistic
versionApp query).

I don't care if they are all insecure, don't care if they are smart enough to
spoof the sniffer (since that means they're not likely too old), and am not
really looking for the ultimate sniffer. Just one line the effectively
splits 4.0 from 5.0.

However, I did read your references, which served to catch me up on an area
I'd not paid much attention to in recent months/years. Thanks for the
time.
Wade

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Wade G. Pemberton wrote:

Thomas :
Instead of a personal salutation which is quite nonsensical in a m:n medium
like NetNews, you should have provided a short attribution line so that the
quoted text can be assigned to its respective author without looking up the
thread structure (if still available).

Before anyone else suggests it: Using the User-Agent header is not
reliable <http://pointedears.de/scripts/test/whatami>. If know that
Norton Internet Security modifies, even removes the User-Agent header.

Yet the warning should be issued for all IEs below 6.0 SP-1 where many
security bugs have been fixed.

I'm not doing anything so dramatic as warning people about security
issues.

Then you should refrain from annoying your users like this.
I'm using some inline styles to display photos, titles, atl tags,
descriptions etc in one viewing area, and want to warn folks with
really old browsers that the page will blow up if they push the
buttons.
If they deliberately chose a buggy browser, let them.
Netscape 4.x is easy to detect,
Is it really?
and give a warning. I'm not sure there are too many
IE 4.0's out there, but they're worse in terms of supporting dynamics, so
I decided to add a warning for them.
Instead of pursuing such a nonsense you should pursue a solution of
graceful degradation as often discussed in this newsgroup. Especially
CSS provides quite easy ways to do so:

<http://www.w3developme nt.de/css/hide_css_from_b rowsers/>
It's just an afterthought, and I was curious to see if anyone had
rendered a quick script that split IE4.0 from IE 5.0 and ff. ( MS

insists they're all 4.0 in response to the simplistic versionApp query).

It is because they are in a sense on the level of Mozilla/4.0. Because
historically evolved, most of the User-Agent header of Web browsers,
especially the navigator.appNa me and navigator.appNa me components, has
become meaningless.
PointedEars

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Wade G. Pemberton wrote:

Thomas :
Instead of a personal salutation which is quite nonsensical in a m:n medium
like NetNews, you should have provided a short attribution line so that the
quoted text can be assigned to its respective author without looking up the
thread structure (if still available).

Before anyone else suggests it: Using the User-Agent header is not
reliable <http://pointedears.de/scripts/test/whatami>. If know that
Norton Internet Security modifies, even removes the User-Agent header.

Yet the warning should be issued for all IEs below 6.0 SP-1 where many
security bugs have been fixed.

I'm not doing anything so dramatic as warning people about security
issues.

Then you should refrain from annoying your users like this.
I'm using some inline styles to display photos, titles, atl tags,
descriptions etc in one viewing area, and want to warn folks with
really old browsers that the page will blow up if they push the
buttons.
If they deliberately chose a buggy browser, let them.
Netscape 4.x is easy to detect,
Is it really?
and give a warning. I'm not sure there are too many
IE 4.0's out there, but they're worse in terms of supporting dynamics, so
I decided to add a warning for them.
Instead of pursuing such a nonsense you should pursue a solution of
graceful degradation as often discussed in this newsgroup. Especially
CSS provides quite easy ways to do so:

<http://www.w3developme nt.de/css/hide_css_from_b rowsers/>
It's just an afterthought, and I was curious to see if anyone had
rendered a quick script that split IE4.0 from IE 5.0 and ff. ( MS
insists they're all 4.0 in response to the simplistic versionApp query).

It is because they are in a sense on the level of Mozilla/4.0. Because
historically evolved, most of the User-Agent header of Web browsers,
especially the navigator.appNa me and navigator.appVe rsion components,
has become meaningless.
PointedEars

[Randy Webb]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

Wade G. Pemberton wrote:

Thomas :

Instead of a personal salutation which is quite nonsensical in a m:n medium
like NetNews, you should have provided a short attribution line so that the
quoted text can be assigned to its respective author without looking up the
thread structure (if still available).

If they over-attribute, you whine. If they under-attribute, you whine.

Are you actually as anally retentive as you act?

Before anyone else suggests it: Using the User-Agent header is not
reliable <http://pointedears.de/scripts/test/whatami>. If know that
Norton Internet Security modifies, even removes the User-Agent header.

Yet the warning should be issued for all IEs below 6.0 SP-1 where many
security bugs have been fixed.

I'm not doing anything so dramatic as warning people about security
issues.

Then you should refrain from annoying your users like this.

You must be.

I'm using some inline styles to display photos, titles, atl tags,
description s etc in one viewing area, and want to warn folks with
really old browsers that the page will blow up if they push the
buttons.

If they deliberately chose a buggy browser, let them.

You are making the unfounded assumption that they have a "choice" about
the browser. You really should learn to read up on things before you
babble incoherently about things.

Netscape 4.x is easy to detect,

Is it really?

Yes, it is quite easy actually.

and give a warning. I'm not sure there are too many
IE 4.0's out there, but they're worse in terms of supporting dynamics, so
I decided to add a warning for them.

Instead of pursuing such a nonsense you should pursue a solution of
graceful degradation as often discussed in this newsgroup. Especially
CSS provides quite easy ways to do so:

<http://www.w3developme nt.de/css/hide_css_from_b rowsers/>

You really are as stupid as you act. The only reason you have not joined
George in the trash-can is because I don't want innocent people
believing your garbage nonsense.

Also, you should check into your User Agent for News, it seems to be
quite adept at double-posting articles. In the event you do it to make
sure they read it twice, I can almost guarantee that if they don't
comprehend your babble the first time, reading it twice won't help them.

--
Randy
comp.lang.javas cript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Randy Webb wrote:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

Wade G. Pemberton wrote:
[...]

I'm using some inline styles to display photos, titles, atl tags,
descriptio ns etc in one viewing area, and want to warn folks with
really old browsers that the page will blow up if they push the
buttons.

If they deliberately chose a buggy browser, let them.

You are making the unfounded assumption that they have a "choice" about
the browser. [...]

If they don't have the choice, telling them that something else is
better does not help either. For the rest of your posting, I have
had enough of your "style" for the next month.
PointedEars