[theme-reviewers] Newbie theme reviewer question - Browser compatability

Fri Feb 1 13:49:20 UTC 2013

Repeated, completely off-topic but entirely related, Microsoft has produced
a site at http://modern.ie that makes testing IE as simple as possible
(providing VHDs for Mac and Linux as well). Just in case anyone missed it :)

On 1 February 2013 08:42, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:

> As long as the reviewer is using a "modern" browser in their process I am
> not overly concerned they review the theme in multiple browsers. For the
> most part, what we as reviewers are looking at will be apparent no matter
> which browser the theme is being viewed with; and, also, visual issues with
> the theme tend to fall mostly to aesthetics which also (for the most part)
> are not requirements that need to be met for approval.
>
> Now, all that being written, if a reviewer finds that in a specific
> browser something doesn't *look* right (but does *work* correctly) it is
> strongly recommended the reviewer let the theme author know so they can
> address that issue if they choose to.
>
> Edward Caissie
> aka Cais.
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 3:08 AM, Paul Appleyard <paul at spacecat.com> wrote:
>
>>  On 1/02/2013 5:53 PM, Alex Watson wrote:
>>
>>  I think we should recommend that the theme works in all modern browsers.
>> Microsoft have just launched http://www.modern.ie making it a lot easier
>> to test in IE. Being a web developer I have a Browserstack account, as
>> making sure my work is cross browser compatible is essential to me.
>> Besides, nowadays its a lot easier to make sure sites work in IE, compared
>> to the days of IE6!
>>
>> *
>> *
>> *Agreed; but once again it comes down to the reviewer testing it in all
>> modern browsers.*
>>
>>
>>
>>  Btw the guy who built the theme has got back to me and says that the
>> theme does not support IE9+. (odd, as i notice he does include the
>> html5shiv.js, so he must be thinking about IE at least. Anyway I am yet to
>> actually test his site in IE) As a theme reviewer, regardless of the
>> guidelines I will be testing in all modern browsers anyway. If a site
>> totally breaks in IE9+ (perhaps even in IE8) then I'd have concerns.
>>
>>
>> *So 'does not support IE9+' would mean all IE versions - unless for some
>> weird reason it works in, say, IE8 .. but I guess what he's saying is that
>> he doesn't expect it to work properly in IE. Out of curiosity, what are
>> these features that IE can't handle?*
>>
>>
>>  Alex
>>
>>
>> *Paul*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  On Friday, 1 February 2013 at 07:13, Paul Appleyard wrote:
>>
>>   Any new browser-centric requirements would hit a limitation on what
>> browser the reviewer uses, or can use. So there's a built-in restriction on
>> browser support, in that it must support the reviewer's browser, which is
>> very likely a recent Chrome or Firefox iteration.
>>
>> I guess it (theme-specified browser requirements) would also come in to
>> play as an issue if the theme author is implementing some pretty specific
>> Javascript or HTML5 (some advanced canvas manipulation stuff for example,
>> although Excanvas helps there too with IE7/8) And that's bleeding in to
>> plugin territory, really.
>>
>> To sum up: If it doesn't break in a way to fail on existing guidelines,
>> let it be. Therefore, the only amendment to review guidelines would be that
>> testing be done in an up-to-date browser; is that requirement in there
>> already?
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On 1/02/2013 2:43 PM, Justin Tadlock wrote:
>>
>>  I'm pretty much in agreement with Chip.
>>
>> My personal rule in regards to IE is to support the 2 latest versions,
>> which are currently 9 and 10.
>>
>> On 1/31/2013 7:03 PM, Chip Bennett wrote:
>>
>>  I have no problem with it. A properly developed and designed Theme
>> should have minimal IE issues anymore, anyway.
>>
>>  I don't "support" IE with my Theme, either. I can't; I use Linux, and
>> thus have no way of even *running* IE.
>>
>>  Doing something that actively *excludes* IE (or any other browser)
>> would certainly not be acceptable; but developing a standards-compliant
>> Theme, and opting not to jump through hoops for IE? Meh; doesn't bother me
>> all that much.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>   Flatly not supporting one of the most commonly found browsers (not
>> necessarily used but it does come with Windows) is not a very good idea;
>> and although we do not have any specific guidelines in place I think if a
>> Theme Author is going that route something that significant should be in
>> the Theme description.
>>
>>  As it is, you would be better served by asking the Theme author to
>> explain that statement before making any assumptions. As noted, it may only
>> be that they are supporting current versions of IE and simply left off the
>> version number in their readme file.
>>
>>  Myself, for general distribution themes, I only support current (or one
>> version back at the most) browsers. I don't state the actual version only
>> making reference to the browser being current. Of course, client work is
>> generally different but those "rules" do not necessarily apply here.
>>
>> Edward Caissie
>> aka Cais.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 7:12 PM, John Heimkes IV <john at heimk.es> wrote:
>>
>>  That's a great question, actually. I'd like to know what the general
>> consensus is on this matter. Don't worry about being fussy. I've been doing
>> front-end for many years. So, I totally get it.
>>
>>  My personal opinion is if they're not going to support certain browsers
>> (aka, the browsers most of us web developers have to support on a daily
>> basis), the author *should* make it known up front - especially in the
>> CSS file for good documentation purposes. Some sort of clarification from
>> the author would be nice in this case. Maybe they're just not supporting
>> older versions of IE and it looks fine in IE10, and maybe even IE9.
>>
>>  Anyway, I hope someone else has a better answer!
>>
>>  Thanks,
>> John Heimkes IV
>>
>>  On Jan 31, 2013, at 6:03 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  Since IE has at least 30% browser share, I think theme has to support
>> it.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Alex Watson <alex at alexwatson.co.uk>wrote:
>>
>>  Hi everyone!
>>
>>  So I'm reviewing my first theme, and a few mins into it I find this in
>> the readme.txt:
>>
>>  * NOT SUPPORTED on Internet Explore *
>>
>>  Is that okay? Are themes allowed to be built and not work in IE at all?
>> It's probably the fussy web developer side of me coming out here, as
>> everything I do has to work in IE8+ :) I've not got so far as to have
>> tested it in IE yet, but are we even required to do cross browser testing?
>> I think we should, but I can't see that in the review guidelines anywhere.
>>
>>  Anyway, please let me know if I'm just being too fussy here! (and sorry
>> if this has been asked before but I just joined this mailing list a couple
>> of days ago)
>>
>>  Many thanks
>>
>>  Alex
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing listtheme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.orghttp://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing listtheme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.orghttp://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing listtheme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.orghttp://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20130201/7cd324e7/attachment-0001.htm>