How to find if statusbar is hidden or visible in firefox?

[saraltoms]

Hi,

I have some issue in identifying if the status bar is visible or
hidden in a window.

window.statusbar will return the statusbar object of the window. And
window.statusbar.visible will return true, if the status bar is
visible. The issue here is , even if the status bar is hidden in my
current window, the window.statusbar.visible returns true.

Is there a javascript solution to identify if the status bar is
visible or hidden in firefox browser ?

Does anybody came across this issue in Firefox ?

Inputs will be greatly appreciated.

Saral

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Why on earth do you care? What do you prose doing (or not doing)
depending on whether the user has chosen to have the sates bar shown or
not?

It is possible that they would like to know whether they can generally use
the status bar for displaying additional information.

A default read-only `window.status' property
(dom.disable_window_status_change == true) and a default forced status bar
display for popup windows (dom.disable_window_open_feature.status == true)
in recent Mozilla-based browsers notwithstanding, it is certainly a bug in
the Gecko DOM that `window.statusbar.visible' would yield `true' even if the
status bar is not displayed. I could confirm this bug in Iceweasel 3.6.3
(Mozilla/Gecko 1.9.2.3, build 20100404).


PointedEars

 

[Dr J R Stockton]

In comp.lang.javascript message <1dWdnQ_d2JDe7d3RnZ2dnUVZ7sadnZ2d@gigane
ws.com>, Fri, 16 Jul 2010 15:44:04, Richard Cornford

Why on earth do you care? What do you prose doing (or not doing)
depending on whether the user has chosen to have the sates bar shown or
not?

That is a very ill-mannered (and careless) response to a perfectly
reasonable question.

There is one ambiguity in it, however; is "hidden" to be taken in the
HTML/CSS sense, or does it refer to whether the corresponding marks can
actually be seen on the (presumed to be working normally) screen? AIUI,
the latter cannot be detected; but the question remains valid.

 

[David Mark]

In comp.lang.javascript message <1dWdnQ_d2JDe7d3RnZ2dnUVZ7sadnZ2d@gigane
ws.com>, Fri, 16 Jul 2010 15:44:04, Richard Cornford


That is a very ill-mannered (and careless) response to a perfectly
reasonable question.

Doc, you are not one to lecture on manners. As for careless, I
believe Richard has stated that he is dyslexic, so typos in his posts
are to be expected (and ignored by well-mannered participants).

There is one ambiguity in it, however; is "hidden" to be taken in the
HTML/CSS sense,

In *what* sense?

or does it refer to whether the corresponding marks can
actually be seen on the (presumed to be working normally) screen?

Talk about ambiguous. What marks?

AIUI,
the latter cannot be detected; but the question remains valid.

The question is valid and the answer is no (at least at this time).
But as this is not a help desk, discussions of the OP's motivations
are appropriate.

 

[Dr J R Stockton]

In comp.lang.javascript message <6f1d6347-7376-4b03-9510-85788f4d5628@t1
3g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:52:02, David Mark

Doc, you are not one to lecture on manners.

How would you know?
Note that a gentleman is never unintentionally rude.

As for careless, I
believe Richard has stated that he is dyslexic, so typos in his posts
are to be expected (and ignored by well-mannered participants).

Yes, but misspelling the name of a part of the system is unusually
careless. He usually does much better.

In *what* sense?

Surely you have heard that it is possible to use the special word
'hidden' both in HTML and in CSS ?

Talk about ambiguous. What marks?

Well, not you, Karl, or Groucho. Variations in the intensity at various
wavelengths of the light emitted or reflected by the screen, often
perceived as meaningful.

 

[David Mark]

In comp.lang.javascript message <6f1d6347-7376-4b03-9510-85788f4d5628@t1
3g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:52:02, David Mark
<[email protected]> posted:







How would you know?
Note that a gentleman is never unintentionally rude.

Are you privy to my intentions?

Yes, but misspelling the name of a part of the system is unusually
careless.  He usually does much better.

Read up on dyslexia, stupid (intentional).

Surely you have heard that it is possible to use the special word
'hidden' both in HTML and in CSS ?

Yes, yes I have. But that doesn't make your intentions any more
lucid.

Well, not you, Karl, or Groucho.

Are gentlemen intentionally unfunny?