[sldev] New to the list with a complicated question.

[Anna Gulaev]

Hi, Whump. Is there a reason you recommend against sniffing headers for the
user agent? I recognize that some people run browsers that allow them to
change this, but they are few and they likely don't spoof it to look like
the SL browser, and if they do, not displaying flash for them probably won't
cause them physical harm :-)

I suspect the number of users who browse with Javascript disabled is larger
than the number that spoof their user agent. I try not to do things that
require javascript, because I'm one of those pesky users that disables
javascript, so I know what it's like to view websites that are missing
content that shouldn't require javascript.

Of course there's the concern that by not displaying flash for the SL
browser you risk not automatically taking advantage should it be able to
display flash in the future. Is this what you're getting at?

Thanks,
Anna

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Whump Linden wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Infinity Linden wrote:
>
> > here's a sample page that illustrates grabbing headers from a request
> > and looking at the user agent:
>
> I recommend against sniffing headers for user agent.
>
> The Stack Overflow thread I mentioned above suggested a library on
> google code: http://code.google.com/p/swfobject/
>
> This allows you to specify the flash content and the non-flash
> alternative content.
>
> -- whump
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20090929/b69bfba8/attachment.htm