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

[Kirk Wight]

My creds don't allow me to edit Make, but I added it to the Codex here:
http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Development#Testing_and_QA

On 1 February 2013 08:54, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:

> @Kirk - That should actually get onto the Make site as a reference /
> resource / tool
>
> Edward Caissie
> aka Cais.
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Kirk Wight <kwight at kwight.ca> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20130201/566a0648/attachment-0001.htm>