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

Fri Feb 1 14:18:16 UTC 2013

Great! We'll see about getting it added to "Make" as well

Edward Caissie
aka Cais.

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Kirk Wight <kwight at kwight.ca> wrote:

> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/df6910db/attachment-0001.htm>