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

Fri Feb 1 14:49:49 UTC 2013

I think the answer is plain:

Sign up as a reviewer and the TRT sends you a Surface. *grin*

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Alex Watson <alex at alexwatson.co.uk> wrote:

>  Great stuff - I'm really pleased to see this happening :)
>
> Alex
>
> On Friday, 1 February 2013 at 14:18, Edward Caissie wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>

-- 
-Doug
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20130201/2304a6ea/attachment-0001.htm>