[thelist] Wanted: the definitive fool-proof mouseover JavaScript

[.jeff]

paola,

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: From: Paola Kathuria
:
: > > Nope, IE3 and NS2.02 ignore the JS1.1
: > > script whilst NN3 runs it.
: >
: > specifically which versions of ie3?
:
: IE 3.0
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ah, but the point i'm trying to make is that i don't think there *is* a
solution that will fail gracefully for *all* ie3 users (different minor
versions have their own set of nasty problems).

again, there are *many* different versions of ie3.  for example, ie3.02 has
a *much* more robust implementation of javascript than prior minor version
numbers.  some versions can use external javascript files, while others
cannot.

that being said, a user could be using ie3, but could have the latest
jscript engine (jscript 5.6) installed meaning it understands all the latest
scripting stuff from a scripting perspective, but may or may not have access
to objects that would normally be created at run time in newer browsers
thereby causing other odd incompatibility problems.  so, while it may
support image swapping, it might not support higher-level dhtml, even though
the installed scripting engine may.  i haven't had chance or reason to
investigate this further, but that's my understanding of it from the days
when i used to try to support ie3 ("try" being the operative word).

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > i've still gotta wonder though -- for as long
: > as we've had the hassle of developing for ie3,
: > don't you think this sort of solution would
: > have been discovered already?  that to me is
: > an indication that's there's probably something
: > crucial missing (lots of minor version number
: > browsers) from your testing.
:
: Aha, is this the main reason you're not happy with
: it?
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

yes, specifically this bit:

  "there's probably something crucial missing
   (lots of minor version number browsers)
   from your testing"

notice the parenthetical statement.  there's a reason for that.  i will
reiterate what i said above.  there's a lot of difference between all the
minor version numbers of ie3.  what works in one may or may not work in
another.  if this is supposed to be a solution targeted at *all* users of
ie3, then you're testing should involve as many different versions of ie3 as
you can possibly find.  my gut tells me this solution will not work on
several versions of ie3 you test it in.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: And, no, I don't think that everything's been
: invented yet when it comes to, umm, browser-
: friendly web techniques.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

we can agree to disagree then.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: My understanding with IE is that I can only have
: one version installed at the time and so I can't
: test with IE 3.02 that's on browsers.evolt - what
: other IE 3 versions are there and where would I
: get them from?
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

on a window's machine you can only have one version installed.  for ie3 i'd
suggest having an old win95 machine that you can rebuild on a regular basis.

i don't have the research results handy to tell you specifically what
versions of ie3 you should test in and where to get them.  however, if ie3
support is going to be your crusade you'll need to spend alot of time
researching this info and testing on all the various minor versions of ie3
as you can find to see if your method actually works.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: Jeff, if the scripts performed without errors on
: all the browsers you suggest, would you accept it
: was a viable alternative to testing for
: document.images?
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

i think i'd still lean towards object detection as being more accurate.
doing detection based on js version makes me feel dirty and want to take a
bath in boiling water.

keep trying,

.jeff

http://evolt.org/
jeff at members.evolt.org
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/