Comments on: George and Lars on KHTML and WebKit http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/ All about WebKit development Tue, 14 Oct 2008 02:33:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Michael(tm) Smith » WebKit devs kicking some CSS ass http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-16652 Michael(tm) Smith » WebKit devs kicking some CSS ass Thu, 11 Jan 2007 06:20:31 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-16652 [...] ’ Safari blog, make sure to also check out the video of KDE/KHTML developer-demigods Lars Knoll and George Staikos talking about KHTML and WebKit. If you’re a browser-technologies junkie (like me [...] [...] ’ Safari blog, make sure to also check out the video of KDE/KHTML developer-demigods Lars Knoll and George Staikos talking about KHTML and WebKit. If you’re a browser-technologies junkie (like me [...]

]]> By: asbjornu http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-14971 asbjornu Tue, 19 Dec 2006 10:38:06 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-14971 User Agent string sniffing is pretty much braindead no matter what part of the string you might be looking for. Instead, you should as mcroft mentiones, check for features. What does the name of the browser matter? Isn't what features it sports more interesting? Isn't that really what you're looking for with your UA string hack? I would recommend everyone doing UA sniffing to read the following: http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/using-capability-detection/ User Agent string sniffing is pretty much braindead no matter what part of the string you might be looking for. Instead, you should as mcroft mentiones, check for features. What does the name of the browser matter? Isn’t what features it sports more interesting? Isn’t that really what you’re looking for with your UA string hack? I would recommend everyone doing UA sniffing to read the following:

http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/using-capability-detection/

]]> By: mcroft http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-14951 mcroft Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:23:39 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-14951 Personally, I think sites should check for needed features and never assume that the user agent indicates that the features of the browser are what the developer thought they were when the page was published. I still see sites with six year old browser detection that are can only determine the difference between MSIE and NS 4.x. Checking the agent string is not future proof. Checking for the feature you need is. Personally, I think sites should check for needed features and never assume that the user agent indicates that the features of the browser are what the developer thought they were when the page was published. I still see sites with six year old browser detection that are can only determine the difference between MSIE and NS 4.x.

Checking the agent string is not future proof. Checking for the feature you need is.

]]> By: Neo http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-14835 Neo Sun, 17 Dec 2006 19:07:48 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-14835 You should check for AppleWebKit specifically because this is what Apple calls its own HTML rendering engine, which at some point in the future may drop KHTML for a home-grown core, KHTML may be sold/closed down and/or renamed or become so divergent from Web Kit that the two are not interchangeable. The other reasons above also apply, specifically other non-Safari apps may use the Web Kit HTML rendering engine and checking for only AppleWebKit simplifies compatibility checking for *all* Web Kit-using apps. I recently did a small programming job for a third-party website to enable Web Kit compatibility and specifically went the AppleWebKit route for all the reasons stated above e.g. non-Safari browsers, future-proofing. You should check for AppleWebKit specifically because this is what Apple calls its own HTML rendering engine, which at some point in the future may drop KHTML for a home-grown core, KHTML may be sold/closed down and/or renamed or become so divergent from Web Kit that the two are not interchangeable.

The other reasons above also apply, specifically other non-Safari apps may use the Web Kit HTML rendering engine and checking for only AppleWebKit simplifies compatibility checking for *all* Web Kit-using apps.

I recently did a small programming job for a third-party website to enable Web Kit compatibility and specifically went the AppleWebKit route for all the reasons stated above e.g. non-Safari browsers, future-proofing.

]]> By: hyatt http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-14767 hyatt Sat, 16 Dec 2006 00:35:36 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-14767 The AppleWebKit string is where the version number of the framework is located. The AppleWebKit string is where the version number of the framework is located.

]]> By: Shawn Erickson http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-14497 Shawn Erickson Thu, 14 Dec 2006 17:22:54 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-14497 To bad folk don't appear to read Apple's Safari FAQ which recommends this... http://developer.apple.com/internet/safari/faq.html#anchor2 To bad folk don’t appear to read Apple’s Safari FAQ which recommends this…

http://developer.apple.com/internet/safari/faq.html#anchor2

]]> By: Myrd http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-14479 Myrd Thu, 14 Dec 2006 05:00:17 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-14479 History keeps repeating itself. Ever wonder why every browser's user agent header starts with "Mozilla/5.0"? History keeps repeating itself. Ever wonder why every browser’s user agent header starts with “Mozilla/5.0″?

]]> By: On web usability and the fact that we’re not in Internet Explorer anymore, Toto at 1FPS : David Chartier http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-14477 On web usability and the fact that we’re not in Internet Explorer anymore, Toto at 1FPS : David Chartier Thu, 14 Dec 2006 04:22:14 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-14477 [...] ; i George and Lars on KHTML and WebKit For the vast majority of cases, you want to check for the layout engine, not for [...] [...] ; i George and Lars on KHTML and WebKit For the vast majority of cases, you want to check for the layout engine, not for [...]

]]> By: Mr. Fussyfont http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-14471 Mr. Fussyfont Wed, 13 Dec 2006 21:12:10 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-14471 Why test for 'AppleWebKit' and not 'KHTML'? I suppose Konquerer doesn't have AWK in its agent string, so maybe that's the reason -- it would not be similar enough to Safari...? Why test for ‘AppleWebKit’ and not ‘KHTML’? I suppose Konquerer doesn’t have AWK in its agent string, so maybe that’s the reason — it would not be similar enough to Safari…?

]]> By: jamesandrews http://webkit.org/blog/84/george-and-lars-on-khtml-and-webkit/#comment-14460 jamesandrews Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:07:49 +0000 http://webkit.org/blog/?p=84#comment-14460 On the point of agent checking: I've started using Shiira 2b2 and noticed yesterday that Google Calendars currently has this problem. I get an "unsupported browser" message, but it works fine with Safari iteself. I sent an e-mail to their support desk about it and linked back to this post. I'm sure they'll fix it! :) On the point of agent checking: I’ve started using Shiira 2b2 and noticed yesterday that Google Calendars currently has this problem.

I get an “unsupported browser” message, but it works fine with Safari iteself. I sent an e-mail to their support desk about it and linked back to this post.

I’m sure they’ll fix it! :)

]]>