[freenet-dev] IE support: good or bad?

[toad]

On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 10:36:44AM +0100, Dennis Olsson wrote:
> Do we want to let freenet give non-standardized results?

Well, the proposal is to text2html only when talking to dangerous
browsers. For all other browsers the only transformation that will occur
is adding a newline at the beginning if a text file looks like RSS.
> 
> I'm not generally opposed to supporting IE, since it seems to me like it's 
> a step in the wrong direction. If it doesn't support the standards, let it 
> punish itself. The downside is that it in the end only punishes freenet, 
> which is bad.
> 
> This would be a nice thing to have as a plugin, distributed with the node, 
> but I'm not sure of the status of the new plugin system bombe is/was 
> working on.
> 
> If this is going to be implemented in the node in the end, I suggest a new 
> flag. use for instance "?text2html" as the end of an URL it's forwarded 
> to. That way it's not _that_ much leaving the standard.
> 
> // (the more or less idle) Dennis (cyberdo)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20061205/12c3d725/attachment.pgp