We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Browser Versions
Topic Started: Aug 13 2011, 10:06 PM (569 Views)
Cory
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
How far do you go to support as many browser versions as possible, or do you only support the latest version?

I generally try to support the three latest stable versions, but I can only do most proper testing under the latest versions since I always download the latest versions. Do you find yourself using vendor-specific properties, CSS hacks and conditional comments to support earlier versions of the browser? If there's CSS hacks to fix issues, mine as well use them because there's lonely souls out there using older versions because they don't know how to upgrade or can't upgrade for some reason. More CSS doesn't hurt, it's not like JavaScript and will slow down your site. Even JavaScript hacks can be essential for proper browser support; you don't want to go adding a whole lot of JS that will slow down the board, but like a few lines won't hurt anyone. So all in all, it's best to support as many browser versions as possible for the reasons stated, I think.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pando
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
For Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and Opera I only support the latest version, and I don't use vendor prefixes for Firefox 3.6 (border radius and box shadow) and Safari 5.0/Chrome 9.0 (box shadow) and below.

For IE, I will make sure it is useable in IE7+, but I will not use any extra HTML elements or images to replace CSS properties.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DaPizzaMan
Member Avatar
#TeamSupport

I generally try my best to stay away from using CSS3 for the sake of IE8 and below and older versions of some browsers. I don't really go overboard on support for all browsers. I can live with a few minor things that go wrong in browsers that I may never bother fixing (though if it's a simple fix, I'll go right ahead and fix it).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Leonardo
Member Avatar
Hakuna Matata
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
DaPizzaMan
Aug 13 2011, 10:59 PM
I generally try my best to stay away from using CSS3 for the sake of IE8 and below and older versions of some browsers. I don't really go overboard on support for all browsers. I can live with a few minor things that go wrong in browsers that I may never bother fixing (though if it's a simple fix, I'll go right ahead and fix it).
QFT.

Basically the same as DaPizzaMan.
I try to stay away from CSS3. I tend to code on Opera and it seems to work in all browsers.

Also I'm very for CSS > Javascript for coding as it will slow down the board. Especially when people with boards tend to go overboard with codes & modifications in the Board Wrappers.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cory
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If you want me to be honest, you're part of the reason why I posted this topic, Pando. I've noticed you keep telling people to remove vendor-specific properties because they're not needed in the latest version browsers. I can see where you're coming from, but how's the little extra CSS hurting anyone? It would hurt a few here and there members more with the vendor-specific properties removed if they're using an older browser version for the reasons I stated above. It's good to see you still support IE7+ since IE is one of the browsers used most for older versions due to most work and school places of the likes never upgrading, and Helena has told me IE8 users can't upgrade to IE9 on Windows XP. I have IE9 and Helena looks in IE8 so we can determine issues in those two versions. I often use compatibility and document mode to determine flaws in older versions.

I try to stay away from CSS3 that doesn't have much support, CSS3 that offers vendor-specific properties and is well-supported I often use. I find myself using border-radius, text-shadow and box-shadow most often. There's often CSS hacks to deter the use of CSS3, but it too isn't always well supported or is a complicated process. Funny story, I got warned and mod queued on the support board for posting a CSS3 method when it wasn't well-supported, I just told them it will be possible to accomplish in the future.

I find myself using JavaScript most often for fixes, unique features or to move stuff around. Some useful JavaScript for fixes that is very minimal can be found in this topic, particularly the browser classes which I think would be neat to be implemented in all browsers by default. Some people fear the use of JavaScript too much, sure it can slow down the page more, but so can images. You have to think of how much JavaScript ZetaBoards already uses by default. Simple pieces of JavaScript like one to five lines won't take a major impact on a majority of users. If you use a lot, you just may want to give a warning to dial-up users.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Leonardo
Member Avatar
Hakuna Matata
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I was discussing this with Pando as well. He used box-shadow but since it didn't work that well in Opera he used JS to fix it. Now the style that could have been used instead was a simple 1px by 1px image.

I would really prefer to use that image over the JS fix.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cory
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
A lot of times using a box shadow with images will require multiple images, which requires CSS3 multiple background images or JavaScript to add multiple DIV's for the use of multiple images.

In my experience box-shadow works well in Opera except on table cells. Opera is known to have a lot of issues with CSS3 features on table cells.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Leonardo
Member Avatar
Hakuna Matata
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The effect was a simple 1px bevel.

So something like this:
#id { background: #hex url(1pximage.gif) top repeat-x; }

I don't understand the point of using box-shadow to replace that.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cory
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Most inset box shadows, based on my experience are the ones on all four corners like the effect you can accomplish on IF by using borders since cellspacing is applied to the tables and the div.tableborder background takes affect for the actual border, and the CSS borders used is what is considered the box shadow. That too is one way to accomplish it, but it can sometimes be messy by applying it to all tables.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Creative Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply