+1
I think, performance reasons (that are performance reasons in some
browsers, no matter which ones) aren't a reason not to "publish" a web
application, but in contrast to do it - and point to the browser vendors
if their browser is lacking that performance.
If a web app is slow in any browser or slow in any-but-one browser on
the market, that's obviously a problem mainly of the software
("optimized for IE 5 at 1024x768" comes to mind), but if it's the
minority of (current) browsers who lack performance it's an issue there.It might be useful to acknowledge that on the website, like "you use iD with Firefox 12. We know that there are performance issues yet with this browser, but we believe these are due to issues in Firefox, not in iD. Please vote for the bugzilla tickets #12423 and #876343 for that". regards Peter Am 14.05.2013 12:43, schrieb Robert Scott: > On Tuesday 14 May 2013, Dave F. wrote: >> Using the end user's inconvenience to strong arm/embarrass the likes of >> Mozilla into making changes is not the way to design software. This >> should have been sorted out in Beta, or, as it appears to be a well >> known problem - Alpha. > > We would be alpha all the way into 2016 then. > > Really, we've been told that HTML5 & SVG are taking over vector graphics for > the web for nearly 5 years now. There are still painful holes in the > implementations. Without things like iD driving things forward browser > vendors will have little reason to improve the situation. > > There's a limit to how long we can sit back and ooh and aah at new browser > developments without ever actually daring to use them. > > > robert. > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
