Posted by Torgny Bjers on 10/20/81 11:29

Richard Lynch wrote:

>On Mon, October 17, 2005 3:56 pm, Torgny Bjers wrote:
>
>
>>Also, when using <iframe/> you are weeding out those old browsers that
>>
>>
>
>If somebody else wants to weed out old browsers, that's all fine and
>good, but that's not me...
>
>

Didn't say I wanted to. It was a suggestion. :) I personally prefer Lynx
when I am surfing, since then I get rid of everything, including images,
javascript, and plugins -- just me and text. Nah, seriously, I kind of
like Firefox since 80x25 text space in lynx can get a bit annoying when
navigating a site that somebody added a bzillion images to, but let's
not talk about browsers and favorites, since that'd be another long
ardous flame fest. :P

>>Besides, if this is for an editor interface, for a specific client,
>>one
>>could reasonably demand that they use at least one of the newer
>>browsers
>>such as IE5+ or Mozilla. If not for a specific client, or subset of
>>clients, but for a general update of an entire application that is
>>open
>>sourced, I agree with Jasper, don't touch it. :)
>>
>>
>
>I personally don't think I should demand editors use a specific browser.
>
>I believe in customer choice.
>
>For that matter, *I* probably don't use a browser that does this
>right, being as I'm usually on Linux, almost always on Netscape, and
>very very very rarely do PDF and/or Flash work really right for me.
>
>And you know what?
>
>I very very very seldom care badly enough about any of the content I'm
>"missing" and when I do care enough to go get it, I'm disappointed by
>the content more often than I'm pleased that I took that effort.
>
>Again, this is obviously MY weird world-view at work here. :-)
>
>
I wasn't trying to advocate you doing something you don't want to do. If
you consider the feature worth implementing, weighing the options, you
implement it, or you don't, either way, your choice. I merely stated
that it does work, when using a recent browser.

The <iframe/> tag was added in IE3+ which is pretty darn old, and if
you've seen ANYBODY using anything Microsoft-made prior to IE3 in your
server logs of late, let me know. :)

The following major browsers have support for <iframe/>:

Internet Explorer for Macintosh: 5.2 (not sure about 5.1)
Internet Explorer: 3.0 and above
Mozilla: 1.0 and above
Netscape Navigator: above 4.0 (which should be 6.0)
Opera: 4.0 and above
Safari: 1.0 and above

So, if you use one of these browsers, and considering that you rarely
(I'd say about %1-5) see people using anything below these versions,
you'd be safe adding an <iframe/> if you wanted to. If the browser does
not have support for <iframe/> it will ignore the tag and it won't break
anything at all.

As Jason Karns showed in the example from cstv, and you could test that
on all your different browsers and see what happens, if they have the
plugin installed, it ought to work...

But, on that note, if it is entirely vital to display the PDF, why not
convert the PDF to HTML instead and display that then? Would work in all
browsers, a little hit on the server performance, which can be avoided
by caching the results of a PDF -> HTML conversion. Don't ask me where
to get code for this, as I have no clue, but I am sure it exists somewhere.

Regards,
Torgny

[Back to original message]