TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: HTML Programming vs. PDF From:Kris Olberg <kjolberg -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 11 Mar 1998 23:24:47 -0600
>>>I see that as a drawback, actually. Explorer doesn't read JavaScript, but
>>>JScript. But Netscape doesn't honor JScript...Java applets require
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>This is only partly true. Internet Explorer does support JavaScript.
Here's
>>a snippet from www.microsoft.com:
>>
>>"Will JavaScript work in Internet Explorer 4.0?
>>
>>Most functionality in JScript and JavaScript will work across both the
>>Internet Explorer 4.0 and Netscape Navigator 4.0 browsers. The key issue
>>here is that Internet Explorer 4.0 is already fully EMCA-compliant, while
>>Netscape has announced that it intends to support ECMAScript. Internet
>>Explorer 4.0 continues to lead in the standards arena, through its support
>>for key standards such as ECMAScript."
>>
>>IE 3.x supports nearly the same object/event model used for Netscape 2.x
>>browsers.
>
>I'm sorry, Kris, but "nearly the same" isn't "the exact same" and with the
>browser companies subtly shifting the ground from under one another's feet,
>I can't in good conscience wholeheartedly back this approach to online
>documentation. Clients don't pay us for wonderous experiments, but for
>predictable, reliable delivery.
You did say that IE "doesn't read JavaScript," which is not true regardless
of the extent.
I do understand your reluctance, especially given your client base. I write
JavaScript that must work with IE 3.x, Netscape 3.x, and also on a Win3.1
platform. It's not easy. But learning the object/event models supported by
each of these browsers allowed me to quickly rule out the few unsupported
objects/events in each.
Overall, I have found that IE 4.0 interprets JavaScript better than Netscape
4.0. For one thing, objects in an HTML page are global rather than local,
making the code easier to write. This means I don't have to explicitly pass
the object around from function to function as a parm. With Netscape, this
doesn't work. Now you could argue that IE violates strict encapsulation, and
I couldn't disagree with you on that point.
BTW, if you get a chance to browser one of Microsoft's web sites, view the
source and note the usage of language="javascript" in their scripting. You
might be surprised (as I was) at how prevalent it is.
Regards...Kris
-----------------------------
kolberg -at- actamed -dot- com
kris -at- olberg -dot- com
