Re: Just to confirm...

On Dec 19, 2007 11:59 AM, Jim Lucas <lists@cmsws.com> wrote: > Daniel Brown wrote: > > On Dec 19, 2007 11:18 AM, Richard Lynch <ceo@l-i-e.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, December 19, 2007 9:31 am, Richard Heyes wrote: > >>>>> I think that any MTA or client that doesn't work with the > >>>>> Reply-To header isn't worth beans. > >>>> very very true > >>> Well the Reply-To: header isn't for bounces. > >> The OP was asking about Return-path, not Reply-to > >> > >> Furthermore, while the MTA/client/MUA may not be worth beans, that > >> doesn't mean nobody is using it. > >> > >> I don't think any MS products are worth beans; Yet many people are > >> using them. Should I not bother to check IE compatibility? > > > > Actual code from a live page of mine. Just because I could. ;-P > > > > <? > > if(!stristr($_SERVER['HTTP_USER_AGENT'],"mozilla")) { > > die("We only allow Mozilla browsers in here!\n"); > > } > > ?> > > > > DISCLAIMER: Yes, lawyers, I'm aware that client headers can be forged. > > > > I was just about to say the same thing! If Micro$oft can require Internet Exploder for some pages, damn it, I can require Mozilla for others. ;-P Sincerely, A Biased Mozilla Developer -- Daniel P. Brown [Phone Numbers Go Here!] [They're Hidden From View!] If at first you don't succeed, stick to what you know best so that you can make enough money to pay someone else to do it for you.