royale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Support for SVG in older browsers and Operating Systems.
Date Sun, 25 Feb 2018 17:09:26 GMT
So Chrome and IE11 should be our target, although for me test in IE11 is
almost impossible since I'm on a Mac.
but seems the right to do, and we can forget IE8,9&10

I only hope IE11 could be as much as possible to standards nowadays...

2018-02-25 11:26 GMT+01:00 Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com>:

> Some data points:
>
> One of my client’s recently reported browser usage from a sampling of
> close to 70,000 users. (IE 11 is the only version of IE that’s supported.)
>
> Chrome was the #1 browser at 53.5%.
> IE 11 was #2 at 24%
> 3, 4, and 5 were Safari, Firefox and Edge respectively.
>
> With those kinds of percentages, I don’t think we should be dropping IE 11
> support. I’m not sure about IE 10 or IE 9.
>
> Harbs
>
> > On Feb 25, 2018, at 10:56 AM, Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I've been working as a web developer many many years ago. You can't even
> > imagine what kind of hacks we had to do in order to dispay something
> > sophisticated in IE.
> > My colleague who took from time to time some freelance job when Client
> > wanted to be compatible with IE8 or whatever next version - always
> trippled
> > the price because it was a nightmare. :)
> >
> > I've been working for a Client (large corporation with thousends of
> > thousends clients) 6 months ago who had big app in Flex. Where the time
> has
> > come to move forward from Flex to modern web browser technology - There
> > were absolutely no talk about supporting anything like IE. :)
> >
> > IE - in whatever version for me -1 (Binding). :)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Piotr
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 25, 2018, 09:31 Carlos Rovira <carlosrovira@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> my opinion about fallback compatibility is that I expect people creating
> >> Royale Apps in 2018 and beyond with actual browsers and systems, not
> with
> >> old ones.
> >> If a client has IE8 support, then normaly will have Edge, Chrome and
> >> Firefox as well, or if target Android devices, they will be in at least
> in
> >> Android 4 or 5. So it seems to me a hard task if we should take into
> >> account older systems that nowadays has very low user base, and even a
> >> nightmare since we should have to focus in test compatibility while we
> >> don't have people to do so. So that's not doable by us.
> >>
> >> So for me the plan should be to focus in the actual systems widely used
> and
> >> when we get a state near 1.0 (not talking about the number itself, but
> the
> >> feeling that we can make a Royale App with certain easeness and have
> almost
> >> all the functionality we need), maybe it would be ok to look at what
> system
> >> versions are most used and make a plan to stick with them as long as we
> >> can, or at least taking care of how to evolve royale without breaking
> >> things for that systems since we'll have users and Royale Apps out there
> >> that needs to have that support.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2018-02-25 9:02 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <carlosrovira@apache.org>:
> >>
> >>> Hi Harbs,
> >>>
> >>> if ObjectMap is a Dictionary, why don't you rename it to that? I think
> it
> >>> will make more easy for new comers to get it
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> 2018-02-24 21:59 GMT+01:00 Gabe Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>>> There is a ObjectMap class which uses WeakMap or Map and falls back
to
> >>>> regular objects on platforms whether that is not supported.
> >>>> http://royale.apache.org/asdoc/#!org.apache.royale.utils/ObjectMap <
> >>>> http://royale.apache.org/asdoc/#!org.apache.royale.utils/ObjectMap>
> >>>>
> >>>> It should be a decent replacement for Dictionary (including weak
> >>>> references). The only caveat is you need to use get() and set()
> instead
> >> of
> >>>> bracket access.
> >>>>
> >>>> I just added documentation and cleaned it up a bit.
> >>>>
> >>>> What’s interesting about that class is I needed to do some weird
> things
> >>>> with the methods to reassign them. They are not showing up in the
> ASDoc
> >>>> very well…
> >>>>
> >>>> There might be a better way to declare the method (variable) proxies.
> >> Not
> >>>> sure…
> >>>>
> >>>> HTH,
> >>>> Harbs
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 24, 2018, at 9:10 PM, Greg Dove <greg.dove@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That might make porting some legacy Flex code a
> >>>>> lot easier, for example because (iiuc) I think that means Dictionary
> >>>> with
> >>>>> weak keys could be supported. [3] (and I know Harbs did something
> >>>> related
> >>>>> to this in the past, maybe some sort of polyfill, can't recall
> >> exactly)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Carlos Rovira
> >>> http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Carlos Rovira
> >> http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >>
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message