Bugzilla downloads html files?

Alex Rice alex at mindlube.com
Mon Dec 8 15:25:40 EST 2003


On Dec 8, 2003, at 12:46 PM, Scott Rossi wrote:

> The problem is not necessarily Bugzilla.  There are many sites that  
> Safari
> either does not render correctly, or does not run the contained  
> Javascript
> (take a look at the DHTML menu at Logitech.com).

Scott, it's not as if bugzilla is some fancy DHTML site, like the  
Logitech site you mentioned. [*]

In fact Ken's workaround of changing the Safari Useragent implies that  
bugzilla is too smart for it's own good and trying to send  
browser-specific content, instead of simply being standards-compliant.

[*] For fancy DHTML sites, my ultimate test is my citibank online  
banking site. It's a hellish set of DHTML, forms, and javascript that  
was written only with IE in mind. Safari 1.1.1 handles it perfectly.

>  IMO, it's a great browser
> but it's not as complete or forgiving of the wide variety of code that
> veteran browsers understand.

<http://www.arstechnica.com/reviews/003/panther/macosx-10.3 
-12.html#safari> "What it may lack in its ability to fully penetrate  
the bass-ackwards world of Windows-IE-specific web sites, it more than  
makes up for with its excellent, and rapidly evolving support for  
actual web standards and its elegant (if still a bit feature-thin) user  
interface."

I think bugzilla is stupidly written. It's just a bunch of HTML forms  
and CGI scripts. This is not rocket science. There is *no excuse* for  
it to break with a browser that is quite standards compliant (Safari)  
and widely used.

Runrev: not many people run Mozilla and bugzilla has got problems with  
browsers other than Mozilla. I suggested before: may as well put on the  
opening page "Mozilla/Netscape/Firebird is required"


Alex Rice <alex at mindlube.com> | Mindlube Software |  
<http://mindlube.com>

what a waste of thumbs that are opposable
to make machines that are disposable  -Ani DiFranco



More information about the Use-livecode mailing list