[jQuery] Re: long-term browser support strategy
> If w3schools' statistics are at all accurate, there are about the same > number of people using IE 6 as either IE 7 or 8 Stats like that are nice, but I'd be curious to see what kinds of browser stats there are for other people running a (relatively) busy site? "real" people, like on this list... not some website who have no idea where they get their numbers from While even today IE is still a large chunk of browser usage out there thanks to the hoards of people who don't know better (like for instance, my parents), my primary side is like 40% FF, %38 IE (of which i find amazingly, half of those are IE8.. only 10% IE6), 10% Safari, 7% Chrome and that's out of 230,000 unique visits in the past 30 days.. 10% of 38% of IE6 (almost 9,000 visitors) is still a headache to deal with at this point, thankfully jQuery still makes it less of a headache :-) and it's much appreciated I'd lve to just say "screw IE6".. IE7 for that matter too. but unfortunately for one reason or another the masses aren't helping that thinking becoming reality any time soon On Jan 12, 9:15 am, Thomas wrote: > Here's a post from John's blog in which he touches the topic of a > general strategy for browser > support:http://ejohn.org/blog/the-browsers-of-2009/ > > He also briefly writes about it in his (latest?) > book:http://www.manning.com/resig/ > > Finally, John's (and thus jQuery's) testing strategy is to test > against the previous, the current, and the upcoming (nightly build) > version of supported browsers. [citation needed] :p > > P.S.: When I write 'John', it's probably really the whole team behind > jQuery that worked out those approaches. > > On Jan 12, 12:41 pm, RobG wrote: > > > On Jan 12, 1:24 pm, Nathan Klatt wrote: > > > > > IE 6 use is 3 times that of Safari (all versions) depending on whose > > > > statistics you believe. Why not drop support for Safari while you're > > > > at it? And Opera and Chrome? > > > > Because you don't have to do anything to support Safari or Chrome or > > > Opera > > > There are at least 5 Safari-specific quirks catered for in jQuery (I > > just searched for Safari in comments), there are likely others. > > Admittedly that's far fewer than are required for IE, but since IE 6 > > is now about 10 years old, surely it's quirks are well known and > > catered for? > > > > - they actually work. To stop supporting them you'd have to stop > > > supporting standards. > > > Browsers will continue to evolve. If appropriate feature detection is > > already in place and effective alternatives provided to handle quirks, > > you may find that you are handling some new quirks without having to > > write a single line of code. :-) > > > For example, while the bit in jQuery that checks if the event.target > > is a textNode is meant for Safari (pre version 3 I think), it will > > work for any browser that has such behaviour. Safari's behaviour was > > actually compliant with the spec, the far more common behaviour (i.e. > > that event.target is always a nodeType 1) is not compliant. > > > > >> I work with several clients that do > > > >> not want to "lead the way" in this respect, and need to support IE6 as > > > >> long as it has a fair usage share, which may be for several more > > > >> years.] > > > > > That is a sensible decision > > > > Anyone clinging to IE6, at this point, has gone wy beyond not > > > leading the way! > > > If w3schools' statistics are at all accurate, there are about the same > > number of people using IE 6 as either IE 7 or 8. > > > Of course "support" might mean whether new functionality is provided > > for old browsers and whether they continue to be part of a test suite. > > New functions that aren't tested in old browsers can simply be marked > > in the documentation, or simply "features add after version x.y have > > not been tested in browser X" so users know not to use them. > > > -- > > Rob
[jQuery] Re: long-term browser support strategy
Here's a post from John's blog in which he touches the topic of a general strategy for browser support: http://ejohn.org/blog/the-browsers-of-2009/ He also briefly writes about it in his (latest?) book: http://www.manning.com/resig/ Finally, John's (and thus jQuery's) testing strategy is to test against the previous, the current, and the upcoming (nightly build) version of supported browsers. [citation needed] :p P.S.: When I write 'John', it's probably really the whole team behind jQuery that worked out those approaches. On Jan 12, 12:41 pm, RobG wrote: > On Jan 12, 1:24 pm, Nathan Klatt wrote: > > > > IE 6 use is 3 times that of Safari (all versions) depending on whose > > > statistics you believe. Why not drop support for Safari while you're > > > at it? And Opera and Chrome? > > > Because you don't have to do anything to support Safari or Chrome or > > Opera > > There are at least 5 Safari-specific quirks catered for in jQuery (I > just searched for Safari in comments), there are likely others. > Admittedly that's far fewer than are required for IE, but since IE 6 > is now about 10 years old, surely it's quirks are well known and > catered for? > > > - they actually work. To stop supporting them you'd have to stop > > supporting standards. > > Browsers will continue to evolve. If appropriate feature detection is > already in place and effective alternatives provided to handle quirks, > you may find that you are handling some new quirks without having to > write a single line of code. :-) > > For example, while the bit in jQuery that checks if the event.target > is a textNode is meant for Safari (pre version 3 I think), it will > work for any browser that has such behaviour. Safari's behaviour was > actually compliant with the spec, the far more common behaviour (i.e. > that event.target is always a nodeType 1) is not compliant. > > > >> I work with several clients that do > > >> not want to "lead the way" in this respect, and need to support IE6 as > > >> long as it has a fair usage share, which may be for several more > > >> years.] > > > > That is a sensible decision > > > Anyone clinging to IE6, at this point, has gone wy beyond not > > leading the way! > > If w3schools' statistics are at all accurate, there are about the same > number of people using IE 6 as either IE 7 or 8. > > Of course "support" might mean whether new functionality is provided > for old browsers and whether they continue to be part of a test suite. > New functions that aren't tested in old browsers can simply be marked > in the documentation, or simply "features add after version x.y have > not been tested in browser X" so users know not to use them. > > -- > Rob
[jQuery] Re: long-term browser support strategy
On Jan 12, 1:24 pm, Nathan Klatt wrote: > > IE 6 use is 3 times that of Safari (all versions) depending on whose > > statistics you believe. Why not drop support for Safari while you're > > at it? And Opera and Chrome? > > Because you don't have to do anything to support Safari or Chrome or > Opera There are at least 5 Safari-specific quirks catered for in jQuery (I just searched for Safari in comments), there are likely others. Admittedly that's far fewer than are required for IE, but since IE 6 is now about 10 years old, surely it's quirks are well known and catered for? > - they actually work. To stop supporting them you'd have to stop > supporting standards. Browsers will continue to evolve. If appropriate feature detection is already in place and effective alternatives provided to handle quirks, you may find that you are handling some new quirks without having to write a single line of code. :-) For example, while the bit in jQuery that checks if the event.target is a textNode is meant for Safari (pre version 3 I think), it will work for any browser that has such behaviour. Safari's behaviour was actually compliant with the spec, the far more common behaviour (i.e. that event.target is always a nodeType 1) is not compliant. > >> I work with several clients that do > >> not want to "lead the way" in this respect, and need to support IE6 as > >> long as it has a fair usage share, which may be for several more > >> years.] > > > That is a sensible decision > > Anyone clinging to IE6, at this point, has gone wy beyond not > leading the way! If w3schools' statistics are at all accurate, there are about the same number of people using IE 6 as either IE 7 or 8. Of course "support" might mean whether new functionality is provided for old browsers and whether they continue to be part of a test suite. New functions that aren't tested in old browsers can simply be marked in the documentation, or simply "features add after version x.y have not been tested in browser X" so users know not to use them. -- Rob
[jQuery] Re: long-term browser support strategy
Thanks for sharing your opinions, RobG and Nathan. Though, opinions aside, the question still remains; what is jQuery's strategy for keeping/deprecating support for browsers such as IE6?
Re: [jQuery] Re: long-term browser support strategy
> IE 6 use is 3 times that of Safari (all versions) depending on whose > statistics you believe. Why not drop support for Safari while you're > at it? And Opera and Chrome? Because you don't have to do anything to support Safari or Chrome or Opera - they actually work. To stop supporting them you'd have to stop supporting standards. >> I work with several clients that do >> not want to "lead the way" in this respect, and need to support IE6 as >> long as it has a fair usage share, which may be for several more >> years.] > > That is a sensible decision Anyone clinging to IE6, at this point, has gone wy beyond not leading the way! Nathan
[jQuery] Re: long-term browser support strategy
On Jan 11, 10:47 pm, mikewse wrote: > What is jQuery's long-term strategy for browser support - cut off > browsers after a certain number of years or when going below a certain > market share? > > [I'm asking because of the current trend (among some webdevs and also > library developers) advocating to remove IE6 support and force these > users to upgrade their browser. IE 6 use is 3 times that of Safari (all versions) depending on whose statistics you believe. Why not drop support for Safari while you're at it? And Opera and Chrome? > I work with several clients that do > not want to "lead the way" in this respect, and need to support IE6 as > long as it has a fair usage share, which may be for several more > years.] That is a sensible decision - they should not care what browser their visitors are using any more than the colour shoes they might be wearing. If support for the quirks of a particular browser is already built into a library, and the library architecture efficiently implements capability and feature detection to work around them, why go to the effort of removing support? -- Rob
[jQuery] Re: long-term browser support strategy
You are echoing my own thoughts :-) Still, I see "stop supporting IE6" discussions even for JS libraries, like it is "doing the right thing" to help evolve the web. I can understand the reasoning although I don't agree with it. So, I think it would be good if core devs could speak up on their long-term plan. Without this, browsers that you and I need to support may well be gone from the compatibility list in the next version. The only library that seems to have done this homework is BBC's Glow, whose browser deprecation decision tree seems to suggest a worst case of 2% for deprecation (although I think there is a bug in the last part of the algorithm). http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/futuremedia/images/Decision_tree_for_browser_deprecation_100.pdf Best regards Mike On Jan 11, 2:44 pm, Šime Vidas wrote: > It would be really stupid (for a JS library) to cut off any browser > with market-share above 1%, especially IE6 which won't go below 1% > until maybe 2011. > You can be sure, they won't do that. > > The big sites (Youtube, Facebook, ...) are doing a good job in asking > their visitors to upgrade, but IE6 is (reportedly) big in companies > where the regular employee cannot just upgrade if he wants to.
[jQuery] Re: long-term browser support strategy
It would be really stupid (for a JS library) to cut off any browser with market-share above 1%, especially IE6 which won't go below 1% until maybe 2011. You can be sure, they won't do that. The big sites (Youtube, Facebook, ...) are doing a good job in asking their visitors to upgrade, but IE6 is (reportedly) big in companies where the regular employee cannot just upgrade if he wants to.
